A common refrain out there among the people who are pro-delaying e-books (last spotted in the Wall Street Journal article about S&S’s and Hachette’s delays) is that it’s kind of like how in movies you have the new release in the theaters, and then a while later you have the DVD release. Ergo ipso facto quod erat demonstrandum (Latin! It’s what’s for dinner)… DVDs are same thing as e-books, right? You have the hardcover release and then the e-book comes out later.
I don’t understand this e-book/DVD comparison at all. I’d even go so far as to say it’s Greek to me.
Let’s take movies.
When a movie comes out, you pay to see it in the theater. Once. You don’t get to take home the reels (and even if you wanted to those things weigh like 75,000 pounds). You’re paying for the experience of sitting in a darkened theater with strangers and watching it on a giant screen. You’re not buying something tangible.
Then, six months or a year later, the DVD comes out. It’s a tangible product. You get to keep it or give it away or loan it to a friend. And, by the way, it’s usually more expensive than a movie ticket (assuming you didn’t spring for the $17.00 popcorn). It’s also most likely to be purchased by someone who saw the movie in the theater and wants to re-watch it whenever they want or add it their collection.
How does this have anything at all to do with hardcovers and e-books? Watching a movie and owning a DVD are wholly different experiences and models. As subets pointed out in the comments section: One is an experience, the other is a product. DVDs are more expensive and tangible and you can watch it whenever you want. Going to the theater is cheaper and less tangible and you have to go at certain times.
If theater = hardcover, why is going theater cheaper whereas the hardcover is more expensive? If DVD = e-book, why don’t people usually buy the e-books for hardcovers they’ve already purchased?
I mean, yes, there are some points of comparison between e-books and DVDs, in that they’re both digital. And e-books (could/should be) loaded up with all kinds of cool bonus features that are afforded by an electronic format.
And some people might say that the reason DVDs are delayed is so people who are interested in the movie will be motivated to go to the theater first rather than renting it when it comes out on DVD. But the movie industry’s ideal is that someone consumes a movie twice – first at the theater, then with the DVD. If publishers are hoping consumers are going to buy e-books after the hardcover they’d better get to work making e-books a whole lot more awesome.
We already have a model for the e-book delay that makes way more sense: paperbacks. We can debate the merits of that comparison until we’re hoarse, but at least it makes sense as a model – the theory being that people who are excited about a title will be steered first toward the most expensive version of the product. Releases start with the highest price version and then move to the cheapest priced version.
But DVDs/e-books?
What we have here is a failure to communicate.
Also: Rosebud. Just because.
Arabella says
Cripey, just leave it be and let me read in whatever form it's available! No, I'm not really telling you to shut up; I'm just not sure what the big fuss is. And I agree. An e-book is nothing like a DVD, unless it has the "read the text for me" option, and then, I suppose, it would be more like the theater experience.
Arabella says
p.s. where are the monkeys? I want monkeys.
Munk says
Heat. I feel some heat coming off the Lynn-Nathan mash-up… A novel in the making.
Myself, I am likely one of the "others" Nathan mentioned… but I don't hate e-books, in fact I like e-anythings. So, I am not quite sure… this conundrum may be fodder for a short story… stretching it into a novel would be ridiculous.
For the record… Assuming I'm fed and watered, I would take a million readers over a million dollars in a heartbeat.
Dara says
Nathan, I enjoy reading your posts on eBooks. I can honestly say that what I currently know about them, I've learned from your posts. So, thanks 🙂
Perhaps this has been answered before, but do you think that someday Kindle books will be able to be downloaded on other eReaders? I love Amazon, as I think they have the best selection of books, but if I get an eReader, I'm really interested in the Nook, as it has the features I'm looking for–except the fact I can't get books off Amazon. B&N has a great selection but it I still think Amazon beats them in that regard.
I think that's one of the main issues (besides price) I have with all the different eReaders out there–it doesn't seem like they're cross-compatible yet. I could be wrong, but I think there would be many more people considering the transition over to eBooks if it was universal. I don't know if that will happen any time soon, but I'd definitely jump on the eBook bandwagon if it did!
Annalee and Rebecca, I'm with you on the eBook special features too! If eBooks had all sorts of features like DVDs, I'd go out and get an eReader right now.
Nathan Bransford says
dara-
If I had to guess I'd bet there will be a range of products from the tightly controlled (Kindle) to the mostly open (like the Sony Reader and nook). Just knowing Amazon, I'm guessing they'll always retain more control than most and would probably be the last to go DRM free, but I think consumers already have lots of options to choose from.
Anonymous says
I, too, came for the monkeys. Alas, the entire area seems to be devoic of macaques, chims, bonobos, spiders, orangs, apes, and baboons. Wait, I just re-read some of the posts. There are baboons in here!
And also, now that I think abot it, maybe all you writers are the monkeys who, given enough time alone with typewriters, will produce Shakespeare.
D. G. Hudson says
You make some very good points, Nathan, and I agree with what you're saying. Are these changes that are happening to the publishing world similar to the thrashing and squirming that occurs when the butterfly evolves out of its cocoon? We may have to suffer these knee-jerk reactions for the new model to finally emerge. But at least change is taking place. I just hope all new writers aren't squeezed out by the desire of the publishing industry to cling to what they consider their 'bread and butter'. That could have consequences since now there are other options for writers. I'm hoping rational thought will prevail.
BTW- loved the last two lines of your post. Paul Newman saying those words and Orson Wells with his memorable line. Great ending.
Walter Agony says
All this arguing over hardcovers and e-books and paperback and DVD's skirts around what I think is becoming increasingly obvious, which is that there's too much emphasis in general on hardcover books.
It makes sense to sell your most expensive product first, assuming you have a lot of pent up demand — meaning you're a well known author whose fans will want to have the latest thing as soon as possible. For midlist authors and those just starting out, I personally think the first printing should be trade paperback. Paying $25 bucks for a book that isn't "special" in some way just doesn't make sense anymore. Your best chance of having a hit means slanting the business model toward volume, not margins. I'd rather sell a lot of cheaper books than a small number of higher margin books.
A lot of this talk about delaying e-books, etc is really just mean to protect a format — and especially a price point — that is becoming increasingly anachronistic in my view.
I love hardcovers and I understand the dynamics of consumer surplus as much of the next bean counter, but when an author's career prospects are so closely tied to hardcover sales. It makes more sense to launch lesser known authors on trade paperback and reserve the venerable hardcover for special collectors editions and the like.
When e-book prices are being compared to trade paperbacks instead of hardcovers, it becomes much more of a wash and more attractive to push for e-book distribution because you won't have the cash flow risk posed by potential bookstore returns — not to mention there are no incremental production costs.
The publishing industry should stop trying to protect the hardcover price point and focus more on getting volume up any way they can get it: trade, mass market and e-books.
JDuncan says
I honestly don't have much issue with the few months delay on ebooks for certain hardcovers. People have to be careful how they argue this thing because, really, publishers are talking about doing this with a fairly small percentage of their releases. Namely those books they are expecting decent sales from they want to maximize the profit. Folks may worry about the whole slippery slope thing, but publishers aren't dumb. They know how things work. For smaller titles that will require more buzz to build, the ebooks will remain available.
I don't buy the whole lost sales if the ebook doesn't come out at the same time arguement. People want convenience and are impatient. Sale is a sale, right? Not when the margin on hardcovers is so much higher. If folks are that desperate they will buy the hardcover. If they don't, why is it any different than those who always wait for paperbacks to come out? Most of it I think is just folks wanting to get that new release for cheap. If one is inclined to read ebooks (I've yet to be able to afford one), who wouldn't want to be able to get hardcover releases for ten bucks? Why does investing in an ereader entitle you to new releases for less than those who don't? Yes, they're different formats, but you're getting a lot more off than the cost of printing the book.
Are ereader folks going to refuse to buy the digital version four months after the hardcover? Seems a bit spiteful to me. People forego the hardcover for the paperback all the time, have for years, and waiting hasn't been an issue. You want it cheap, you get to wait, and for the most part, readers have been fine with that for years. Why is this now different? Just because digital can be released at the same time doesn't mean it should, at least for some titles. For some, it makes sense, at least from the pubs standpoint. These big titles are the bread and butter of an industry with very low profit margins. They can't just drop that overnight in favor of conveniencing readers with cheaper formats. Perhaps when the market changes and enough digital copies will sell to counteract the lower price point and offset lower hardcover sales. We'll probably get there eventually but now isn't the time, no matter what Amazon might think.
Munk says
– D.G. Hudson –
I don't believe rational thought has a play here. Techno trends are driven by human nature and money. The publishing industry will be slow to adapt, but just like the music industry and it's past nemesis (nemesi?) Napster and others… the publishing industry will eventually converge toward a new normal. AKA storm and norm. Note… nice icon pic. Munk
--Deb says
One other argument for having the ebook available WITH the hardcover? I have a limited budget for my library enhancement, but lots (and lots) of books I'd like to buy. I can get two-and-a-half ebooks for the price of a hardcover, so my upfront value is greater.
But. Then, since I'm an avid re-reader, if I truly loved the book, I'm going to buy the paperback when it comes out a year later.
The cost of the ebook plus the cost of the paperback is roughly the same as the hardcover would have been in the first place, only by then, I'm buying something I KNOW I like, and will be more likely to buy the book. (Just like I'm more likely to buy the DVD of a movie I've seen and enjoyed in the theater, than one I haven't seen at all.)
To my mind, this makes it much more profitable for the publisher–if I can buy the ebook when that first itch for a new book comes up, I will–rather than seeing the hardcover in the store and saying, "Sounds great, but I'll have to wait until it comes out in paperback" … and then forgetting about it when it finally does come out. But, if I've read it once, electronically, I'm going to be a lot more likely to remember how much I want it when it comes out in the more affordable paperback.
Steve says
I think the parallel is accurate and reasonably precise. It needs to be adjusted for the different consumption model between movies and books.
Books are sold as products. Movies are sold as experience. This distinction is confused by the fact that it is possible to buy a DVD as a product, but this is relatively rare. The vast majority of DVD consumption occues via rental. And the price of a new release DVD rental is rarely over $3.50, whereas the price of a movie ticket is rarely under $6.00. If you want to consume the movie socially as a group event, the price difference is even more marked. 2-4 people can consume a DVD showing for one rental fee, whereras they must pay for individual theater tickets.
As in the book versus ebook model, there is a tradeoff between price and convenience on the one hand and quality of experience on the other. The ebook is cheaper to purchase and more convenient to access, but delivers a lower quality reading experience than the paper product.
I don't really care who releases e-books when, since I don't read them. But the parallel between the two sets of media appears to be well founded.
-Steve
Allison says
JDuncan, isn't the solution then to simply price the new release ebooks at a higher price point? People are accustomed to paying more to have something as soon as it comes out, particularly people who buy electronics. Release the ebook and the hardback at the same time with the ebook priced to generate the same revenue as the hardback. It would still be less expensive since the materials, printing and distribution are no longer an issue, but the publisher still makes the same amount of money. Everyone wins.
Like I said before, catering to the instant gratification demands of the public will earn them more money in the end.
Nathan Bransford says
allison-
Well, one irony is that right now publishers are receiving the same amount for ebooks and hardcovers already. Publishers are taking a stand on the window for reasons other than strictly immediate revenue.
Doralynn Kennedy says
E-books and DVDs — that might be the 21st Century's 'apples and oranges.' Those are fruits. E-books and DVDs are entertaining. As was this post.
D. G. Hudson says
In response to Munk – I have to agree with your comment about money being a major deciding factor in how these changes take place. But having worked in the corporate world for many years, I know that marketing plays a huge role in many decisions, and marketing plays to the trends. You make some good points in your comments.
I still prefer to think that this is all a phase – it keeps up our interest in the industry as we all sit on the sidelines and watch. There has to be more level heads like Nathan in the industry.
Allison says
Nathan, the irony you point out just refutes JDuncan's claim that publishers aren't dumb. It seems to me that they're short-sighted and panic-stricken to the point of making illogical decisions to maintain an illusion of the control they once wielded.
Nathan Bransford says
Allison-
I wouldn't say dumb. I think what is happening is that publishers are nervous that while Amazon will take a loss on ebooks now they won't in the future, so better to take a stand now rather than strengthening Amazons hand. I'm not sure I agree with the philosophy, but they're not arriving there out of stupidity. They're worried that the publishing model that JDuncan outlines will disappear, threatening their business.
J says
Nathan, do these changes excite you more as an agent or as an author? (Clearly as a reader, you're pumped) And the flip side, too–in which hat do you feel more anxiety, if any?
Daisy Whitney says
Hi Nathan:
Great insight as always. My worry though is history has taught us when media companies try to exert too much control over how consumers get content, consumers push back. I am all for windowing strategies and it's worked well in TV and film, but I think the risk lies in taking away a window that some consumers (like you, I am also a Kindle fan) have become accustomed to. I'm am author as well, so I am curious how this will all play out and my hope is it plays out in a way that incentivizes readers to buy-rent-borrow more books!
Best,
Daisy Whitney
Susan Quinn says
I'm also here for the monkeys.
But please keep informing us about e-books, and everything publishing, as you do so well.
I'd like to say I never buy hardcovers, but I bought one today . . . as a gift . . . for my Mom who's getting an e-reader, but I can't gift her the title I wanted. I can get her a gift-card, but it's not the same.
This shouldn't be this difficult, and if it wasn't Christmas, they would have lost my sale.
It's really just bad business to make it difficult for your customers to buy your products.
Anonymous says
Why are movie theatre tickets cheaper than DVDs? Excuse me, what is the cost if you go to the theatre with a date, or a friend, as the overwhelming majority of people do? It is higher than the DVD price, which is also designed for mutliple simultaneous viewing. (This excludes the cost of the ridiculously high mark-up popcorn, soft drinks, etc.–the theatre owners' chief source of profit.) Cheaper than DVDs? Are you kidding? Furthermore, stop fixating on the physical costs of manufacture and distribution and look at the TOTAL costs of product creation, as every media executive must do. The reason the movie business is so hits-driven is the infinite profit margin associated with the all the ticket sales beyond the point that the blockbuster has recouped its total cost. This also accounts for the wild volatility in studio profits, based on their seasonal hits. If you are going to take on the economics of media businesses, books or movies, take on the totality of their cycle costs, all the way through the supply chain, and not just a fraction. Book publishers are likewise concerned with segmenting their markets in order to improve their odds of recouping total costs and generating an acceptable return on investment. The profit margins on hardcover book sales are higher than e-books, paperbacks, etc., just as theatre gross sales have higher margins than DVDs. Think of the progression along the format sequence in terms of profit margin, and not just price, and you may gain some clarity on the issue.
Kristin Laughtin says
Definitely agree! The whole point of going to a theater is for the experience. Alright, alright, I suppose the only real comparable point between theater-going and hardcover (at the moment) is that you get access to the story sooner. But you can take a hardcover home and reread it. You can't go to a theater, explain that you've already paid to see the movie once, and expect them to let you in to see it again for free.
I've heard others try to modify the argument to something like VHS/DVD or DVD/Blu-ray. If you liked a movie a lot on VHS, chances are you might have bought it again when DVD became the standard. But that's not quite perfect either: if DVD (or now, Blu-ray) technology were around the corner and you knew you'd be interested, I doubt you'd buy the older format to tide you over until the format you want is really released. At best, you might go rent it. (Like going to a library maybe, in this weird analogy?)
Long story short: I agree with you. Theater/DVD is not the same as hardcover/ebook.
Nathan Bransford says
J-
I'm really only excited about them as a reader. As an agent and author, all this change definitely makes me nervous and I wonder what the future is going to look like. But change and new technology is impossible to resist, and the only thing you can do is continue to adapt and hopefully innovate.
Lydia Sharp says
While we're on the subject of DVDs/movies, can I point out that, even though piracy is prevalent and will forever be a threat to all things digital, filmmakers are still making millions at the box office, actors are not on the streets begging for handouts (not all of them, anyway), and there are still film festivals and awards ceremonies being held annually (and the same goes for the music industry, sort of). In other words, chill. The E-pocalypse, as Eric refers to it, is not going to cripple us. Just change us.
Personally, I buy used DVDs at exchange stores for a fraction of the price, but someone had to buy it new at some point, even if it was on sale when they did. And I still spend money at theaters if I feel the movie is worth it. (AVATAR? SO WORTH IT EVEN IF I HAVE TO STARVE THAT WEEK. JUST SAYING)
And I will continue to buy hardcover books for as long as they are available. Between hardcover, paperback, and e-books, it's not a matter of one being better than the others (for me, that is), it's simply a matter of personal taste. I like hardcovers. They can take a beating. Or give one. Whichever.
Marilyn Peake says
Nathan said:
"I think what is happening is that publishers are nervous that while Amazon will take a loss on ebooks now they won't in the future, so better to take a stand now rather than strengthening Amazons hand."
That’s my impression of what’s happening as well. I think Amazon’s hand is definitely being strengthened, especially now that publishers like RosettaBooks are helping best-selling authors publish their eBooks directly to Kindle and allowing those best-selling authors to take in 50% of the profit, rather than their usual 25%. Now that Stephen R. Covey, author of THE 7 HABITS OF HIGHLY EFFECTIVE PEOPLE and PRINCIPLE-CENTERED LEADERSHIP, has moved his eBook rights from Simon & Schuster over to an eBook publisher who struck such a deal with Amazon for publication of the author’s books on Kindle, I’m guessing other best-selling authors will do the same thing. I’m not the least bit surprised this has happened, by the way. I’ve thought for a long time – ever since Amazon started selling and then publishing POD books, and definitely when they came out with the Kindle – that Amazon's trying to compete directly with publishers. The Kindle allows Amazon to do this much more easily than with POD.
Nathan Bransford says
anon@4:36-
Again, the profit margins on e-books per copy are not currently different than hardcovers for new releases. In fact, when you consider that you have to incur printing and shipping and returns with the hardcovers, e-books are more profitable. If they were abiding by your argument that you start with the most profitable, publishers would start with e-books, if you want some clarity on the issue.
Munk says
Spot on D.G., I agree. I see your 'phase' and raise you a 'recurring debate'.
I appreciate your philosophic rather than misanthropic view.
Munk
Anonymous says
I agree with most of what you're saying but one thing:
I do think of theater as being more expensive than a DVD. I usually don't go to the theater by myself so it s $10xnumber of people going.
Buying a DVD is usually under $20 (on sale).
Renting a DVD is $4 — by far the most economical option when you have multiple people viewing!
This has nothing to do with the comparison to e-books really, I'm just sayin'…
Nathan Bransford says
anon-
Yes, assuming you don't buy snacks, buying DVDs is cheaper than taking the families to the movies, about breakeven for couples (slight edge to theater), and theater wins for singles.
Anonymous says
I come to hear about books, I come for the monkeys and I do come for industry news.
And there have been nothing but posts about e-books everywhere these days. They range from review sites to personal blogs.
The big thing now seems to be how the bigger guys are trying to muscle in on the little ones, including the authors. Evidently, traditional print publishers are beginning to take interest in e-book sales. And it looks things are going to get messy before they even out, because the people who have been paving the way for e-books are going to put up a fight.
Lynn says
Snarking aside, it's the handwringing that gets to me. Like watching a soap opera played out every time I turn on my computer. Yes, the publishing industry should be afraid when Amazon tries to compete with them. Amazon has been successful in almost everything they do, so quaking in the boots is a natural response. But I can't help but think that all of this will be better for consumers; they will consume more books in an array of formats, and in my book that makes writers winners as well.
Maybe it's because I'm an unpublished writer with no agent and no publisher, so I'm looking in from the outside and trying to find out how it will affect ME when I'm a big fat published author. Until then, it's like trying to get worked up over something that hasn't yet truly touched my life. I felt this way about the Writers' Guild strike a few years ago. For them, it was a big deal. For me, meh.
Wendy says
What is this going to do to libraries? I only buy a select few books that I love. The rest of the time, I check things out of the library. Will I be able to read for free in the future? (Well, free after my taxes bought the books for the library.) Or does this digital transition mean the death of libraries?
Marilyn Peake says
Anon @ 5:53 PM said:
"And it looks things are going to get messy before they even out, because the people who have been paving the way for e-books are going to put up a fight."
Actually, the people who worked long and hard for years on end to pave the way for eBooks aren’t even mentioned in any of the ongoing discussions and are not key players. It’s Amazon vs. the big publishers. As usual, the small companies will probably be bought or put out of business when all is said and done. For example, Fictionwise – one of the early pioneers in eBookstores – has already been bought by Barnes and Noble.
Chris Bates says
@anon 5:33 – "…the bigger guys are trying to muscle in on the little ones"
I would be very surprised if those 'little guys' like Fictionwise didn't start out their businesses with an exit strategy. In fact, B&N could have been identified as FW's preferred match right from the get-go.
Maybe authors and agents will have to think this way in the future too. Identify a target retailer, tailor your complete sales package and hope for some form of exclusive sales deal.
Who knows? I'm sure we'll see some interesting experiments in the next few years. Exciting times for publishing … the upside being that plenty of opportunities will open up for new authors and publishers alike.
It ain't all doom and gloom.
shorty411 says
I agree that e-books and dvd's have nothing in common. In my mind hardcovers or similar to blurays more than anything else. Using your argument, you're not going to watch a blu-ray and then go out and buy either the cheaper dvd or cheaper digital copy of a movie.
Which is why I still believe, not only should ebooks come out at the same time, but they should be included with the hardcovers, much like digital copies of movies are being included with blurays or dvd's.
Mira says
Nathan 3:17 – okay that was pretty darn funny.
Um, I didn't even know there were monkeys here. I thought about that for awhile, and then a terrible thought hit me. Maybe I don't know about the monkeys because…….I AM a monkey. I'm not one of the monkeys, am I? I don't want to be a monkey. I hope I'm not a monkey.
On the other hand, I'm pretty sure that if you stuck me in a room for a hundred years, I still wouldn't be able to write Shakespeare. So, that's comforting.
More seriously, in terms of the e-book topic, Nathan, I sort of teased you about this last Friday. I've been alittle worried since then that I was hurtful. The internet is so tricky. I sincerely hope that I wasn't….and I'm sorry if I was.
Because I'm on the outside of publishing, e-books don't affect me quite as much as those already in the industry. I'm interested, but not as much as I would be if it weren't hypothetical for me.
But when you mentioned wanting to participate in the internet debate, it really hit me. That's important. Your blog is how you participate. In fact, you're probably showing great restraint not talking about e-books in every post. Anyway, my point is, this is your blog, and I hope you'll
write about the important issues that interest you, that you want to have a voice in.
Okay. Going to go look for some monkeys now.
Mira says
Not that you need my permission. Did it sound like I thought that? I don't. Of course.
I could fuss with that above post forever. I'm just going to stop now.
Donna Hole says
I didn't like the movie theater-DVD argument either. I go to the movies for the experience of watching on the big screen, with all that noise.
I can't wait to see Avatar in the theaters and I'm thinking it might well be worth the trip to Big Ole Sac to hit the iMax theater. I get motion sick though, so I've been properly warned to take an air-sick bag.
You just can't get that experience in a book: hard cover, paperback, e-book, makes no difference to the experience of reading except how you hold the novel in your hand and how much space you need to store it.
………dhole
mkcbunny says
Nathan, I agree with you. I've been working in the movie/DVD business for my entire adult life, and I don't see a parallel relationship between movie/DVD and hardcover/e-book.
There's a much bigger difference between the experience of seeing a movie in the theater and watching at home than there is between a reading a print book and an e-book.
Many of the other things I would have said have already been covered. I'll be excited to see the Apple e-reader, but I love my Kindle and know that it'll be years before I can afford whatever Apple has cooking anyway.
sex scenes at starbucks says
I have my very own Rosebud. Heh!
I can't agree more. A closer comparison (Sorry if I'm repeating – I can't read all the comments) is CDs vs Itunes. And delaying Ebooks is like a label withholding Itunes. Someone said in another thread about forgetting about the product if they don't all come out at once. Definitely! To me it just makes way more work! And if they aren't making a healthier profit on ebooks than on paper books, then shame on the publishers, because it's definitely possible.
Kelly Bryson says
Okay- ebooks are not DVDs. But can we get a subscription book service like Netflix? (Netboox? That's catchy!) I'm a library girl. I don't waste money on books that I'm not willing to give that shelf space to for years. I JUST bought Harry Potter, for instance, but I bought all of them. Merry Christmas to my 9 year old son!
And Nathan- I am so looking forward to "The Secret Year". That cover is so compelling. I notice it everytime I read your blog.
Donna Hole says
Thermocline: I care about the demise of the pop-up book *sniff*
……..dhole
Maureen Hume says
I like ebooks because my nearest bookstore is a few hundred kilometers away and that makes an ebook download extremely convienent. But I also love paperbacks because they're obviously so much more tactile and very portable.
My life's all about practicallties.
I don't get the comparison to movies and DVDs at all.
Maureen. http://www.thepizzagang.com
GhostFolk.com says
Thank you, dogboi!
It is not about saving hardcover sales; it is entirely about taking control of content value, since Amazon and Walmart have the power to devalue content.
Here you're referring to the delay of new titles moving from hardcover to eBooks.
I'd say this is just the first step of Publishers taking control of the content they own (and helped create), wouldn't you?
Ellen B says
Luckily I've never read a DVD/e-book comparison. Because I feel it makes no sense.
GhostFolk.com says
Just a take: what if Publishers are NOT against eBooks?
What if Publishers were simply waiting to see how a new technology, still in its infancy, might play out before they could best find a fair and reasonable way (for all concerned) to participate?
As in Dog wags own tail.
What if Publishers welcome the new market, still being defined and developed, and are looking forward to the new readers eBooks might generate?
I think all of the above is true. I think Publishers like ALL readers and want to provide them with the best available content skilled editors and amazing authors can provide.
Publishers have to LOVE the time-limit amazon.com has established for eBooks. Are you kidding me? You only get the eBook for a year? Nobody knows if this marketing model will hold, but if it does: goody for the author!
Meanwhile, tell me a Publisher who doesn't like a movie deal. Tell me a publisher who doesn't like a TV series based on one of their author's works.
The eBook market still has to define itself. That's it. That's all. And it is not going to be up to Kindle. It's going to be up to you.
Dan says
You're right that the hardcover to e-book situation is not analogous to the theater to DVD release gap.
I think hardcovers and e-books are more analogous to each other than to anything else. These are two different mechanisms for delivering the same content.
The hardcover format has some nominal advantages; you can lend or sell it. The e-book format has some advantages; delivery is instant and the book doesn't take up extra room in your apartment. But the functional differences between a physical book and an e-book don't really justify the price premium.
This issue is about the pricing of the content irrespective of the format. E-vendors say a new book should cost $10, and publishers find that untenable, even if the e-vendors are currently paying the wholesale price and selling e-books at a loss. Publishers anticipate that a growing public acceptance of $9.99 as the price of a book will force them to eventually lower prices for both e-books and physical books.
By delaying release of high-profile books in e-book format, publishers hope they can prop up the cost structure.
GhostFolk.com says
Dan:
This issue is about the pricing of the content irrespective of the format.
No, not really irrespective of the format when you consider the survival of the brick-and-mortar bookstores.
Bookstores, as much as publishers, depend on the current price of popular hardcovers to survive. If all new HARDCOVER bestsellers were retailed priced $5 less than they are now every indipendent bookstore in America would go out of business overnight.
GhostFolk.com says
What I meant to say, (and perhaps spell a few words correctly):
Bookstores are propped up by the current price structure for new hardcovers (especially bestsellers), too.
By delaying release of high-profile books in e-book format, publishers hope they can prop up the cost structure,