But seriously folks, the 30% to 50% increase in price for a nascent category does not bode well for mass acceptance. Time will tell.
Well, it will keep me from buying them.... It seems if you cut out the cost of printing, warehousing, shipping to retailers, the retailers cost of stocking, selling then the prices should be cheaper than what they are now. The only thing that keeps from using e-books full time is the costs are incrementally cheaper with a steep reduction in benefits. I only buy Kindle books (for the iPhone) if I can't make it to a store beforehand.
What I can't understand is that under the new arrangement, Amazon will get 30% of the proceeds from ebooks, whereas previously they had been purchasing rights wholesale from the publisher for half list price, and selling the ebooks at a loss. Now Amazon will be making more and Macmillan less, according to the Times' math. So how is this a loss for Amazon?
"Book publishers, meanwhile, are volunteering to limit their digital profits. In the model that Amazon prefers, publishers typically collect $12.50 to $17.50 for new e-books. Under the new agency model, publishers will typically make $9 to $10.50 on new digital editions."
I think Macmillan's win is that they can determine what the market price for a book will be, which by their own statements won't simply be more but determined by the individual book.
Also I think this is to stop Amazon from setting themselves up as a Publisher and make the relationship more of an Agency one.
I'll be happy to explain. Amazon was never interested in making money off the ebooks they sell. They were interested in:
1. Being the cheapest and most convenient medium.
2. Selling you an insanely over priced Kindle.
3. Selling you a hundred dollars worth of crap you didn't come to Amazon to buy, because your subconscious is sucking in the 500 products on each page that Amazon somehow knows you really want.
Let's rewrite that (CAPITALIZATIONS are mine):
Quote:
I'll be happy to explain. APPLE was never interested in making money off the APPS/MUSIC/VIDEOS they sell. They were interested in:
1. Being the cheapest and most convenient medium.
That would be iTunes which bizarrely plays my music and videos while also syncing my calendar, contacts, and e-mail to my iPhone and offers to sell me music (by the track!), bonus content, videos and apps all in the same application and also activated my iPhone when I bought it! And its FREE!
Quote:
2. Selling you an insanely over priced IPOD/IPHONE.
3. Selling you a hundred dollars worth of crap you didn't come to THE ITUNES STORE to buy, because your subconscious is sucking in the 500 products on each page that THE ITUNES STORE somehow knows you really want.
Damn iTunes "Recommendations for you"! and that crazy "Genius" thing! Yeah, well, my massive iPhone app catalog is my own fault actually.
When you're trying to criticized Apple's online content distribution prices..
As someone already pointed out, this discussion was about eBook prices not music, TV shows or movies.
But lets see...
Quote:
...its very easy to ignore the fact that THEY are sole reason we have $0.69 - $1.29 songs, and $1.99 tv shows. Not to mention $4.99 movies that are not new releases.
But I guess those prices are too high for you.
When it comes to music, I very rarely purchase anything from iTunes. Why? Because I buy whole albums and they can ALWAYS be found cheaper some place other than iTunes. Either via Amazon's mp3 store, Amazon's regular store or a local retailer. The only music that gets purchased from iTunes now are songs that are exclusive to the store. Also, please point me to the $0.69 songs on iTunes. The selection is so small as to be practically non-existent (and consists of content very few people ever consider purchasing). The same goes for any song under $0.99.
I also never buy TV shows from iTunes. Why? Because I'm stuck playing them in Apple-only devices. I generally never buy digital downloads of TV shows anyhow, but if I were I'd buy them from Amazon's On Demand service. Why? Because I have a choice of devices to watch them on (including the TiVo I already own instead of having to buy an AppleTV to have a decent TV viewing experience). If I want to own a season, I'll buy it on DVD or Blu-Ray because it can ALWAYS be found cheaper than iTunes (for DVD) or in the case of BR the quality is better than iTunes (or any other legal download service).
And movies are the same situation as TV shows. Stuck tied to Apple-only devices. Thanks but no thanks to the lack of choice. And at $4.99, some of those movies would be cheaper to buy on DVD than RENT on iTunes.
If by "up" you mean "upwards", as in helping to get the book dealers better deals and charging the end user more then you're correct. Amazon wanted to charge less, but because of Apple they no longer can. It's indirectly Apple's fault.
Let's be honest--for a digital book $13 to $15 is just wrong. The publishers should have the sense to go with the $9.99 model and sell many more books. In the long run I'd reckon they'd make "A LOT" more money. Less profit per book, sure, but a price point that would get many-an-iPad-owner in to the buying book 'habit'. You see they just see the price and their business sense ends there. I'd say I'd eventually buy an iPad but I won't be buying books at those prices, and not many will.
Apple held off as long as possible to keep music prices at $.99 because they know what will grow the market. Music publishers got greedy and finally forced prices up 30% to $1.29. If you recall, Apple wasn't even mentioning MacMillan at their event, probably because they wanted prices at $9.99 and MacMillan was being greedy in advance (thus the problem with Amazon.) So now they get their 30%-50% increases. The consumer loses by paying more; the publisher loses by getting less; Amazon and Apple win by getting more.
Yet another industry fails to understand how the interwebs function. If something is priced reasonably, then people will buy it, learn where they can legally get copies and will spend money. If it is priced unreasonably, then you are one step away from TPB (The Pirate Bay) and "free".
This is going to cause books to become third(or fourth) in pirated stuff after movies and music and/or software.
What is even more ridiculous is how these prices are pretty much based on hardcover prices. When distribution costs for e-books is only a fraction of that for a normal book.
I believe those who are disparaging Apple don't really understand how little best-selling authors make -- and how much Amazon was further limiting the compensation writers (and publishers) make from their books.
Until the pressure from iPad forced Amazon to change their compensation structure, Amazon was taking a whopping 70% of the sale from $9.99 e-books sold for the Kindle. That leaves a pitiful amount of money available for the publishers ... and even less for the authors who slave away to write great books.
(Many best-selling authors cannot even afford to write full time -- they must have another job in order to make ends meet.)
Under the new Apple 70-30 compensation structure (where the seller only takes 30%) that Amazon was forced to adopt in response ... the publishers/authors will make as much as $10.50 cents for every $15.00 e-book sold. This will make things much more sustainable for writing and publishing industries, and ultimately lead to better work.
And honestly, regardless of the savings that comes from not having to print and physically distribute the books, the content of a great book is still an amazing value at $12.99 - $14.99. There are so many books I've read that have changed my life, and if we continually push them to basement prices ... we devalue what authors do, and will ultimately starve a group of creatives who brings us ideas and content that greatly enhances our lives.
I'm all for conscious capitalism and fair free markets, but kudos to Apple for a) creating a new device that will facilitate more e-book sales .... b) dramatically enhance the reading experience (my opinion, based on what I've seen from the iPad's book app) ... and c) help better compensate dying publishers and struggling writers so that their industry, craft and contribution can grow.
I don't believe Steve Jobs is "saving" the publishing industry, but he is definitely helping it -- even if he is causing consumers to pay slightly more for information that is well worth the price.
As someone already pointed out, this discussion was about eBook prices not music, TV shows or movies.
But lets see...
When it comes to music, I very rarely purchase anything from iTunes. Why? Because I buy whole albums and they can ALWAYS be found cheaper some place other than iTunes. Either via Amazon's mp3 store, Amazon's regular store or a local retailer. The only music that gets purchased from iTunes now are songs that are exclusive to the store. Also, please point me to the $0.69 songs on iTunes. The selection is so small as to be practically non-existent (and consists of content very few people ever consider purchasing). The same goes for any song under $0.99.
I also never buy TV shows from iTunes. Why? Because I'm stuck playing them in Apple-only devices. I generally never buy digital downloads of TV shows anyhow, but if I were I'd buy them from Amazon's On Demand service. Why? Because I have a choice of devices to watch them on (including the TiVo I already own instead of having to buy an AppleTV to have a decent TV viewing experience). If I want to own a season, I'll buy it on DVD or Blu-Ray because it can ALWAYS be found cheaper than iTunes (for DVD) or in the case of BR the quality is better than iTunes (or any other legal download service).
And movies are the same situation as TV shows. Stuck tied to Apple-only devices. Thanks but no thanks to the lack of choice. And at $4.99, some of those movies would be cheaper to buy on DVD than RENT on iTunes.
I agree with all that and I'd add that I've been burned lately by apple's DRM on its music. Non-MP3 format is annoying to me right now, and I've hit the limit of machines i can authorize with the stuff i've paid for. In the end, I'd rather buy a CD and rip it.
I agree with all that and I'd add that I've been burned lately by apple's DRM on its music. Non-MP3 format is annoying to me right now, and I've hit the limit of machines i can authorize with the stuff i've paid for. In the end, I'd rather buy a CD and rip it.
If you wish to play the songs you bought on iTunes on devices that don't use the apple format ACC then, in iTunes, select all the songs you want converted and ask iTunes to convert them into MP3, pretty much everything can play MP3.
I've just tested it so I know that works. Also, it is my understanding that as DRM has been removed from iTunes bough music (the price for this from the music companies was variable pricing) you can now do what you want with your music.
You can for example, in iTunes, select all of your music, convert it to MP3, then drag and drop the whole lot into a folder on your desktop and move it else where.
On the point of pricing and DRM it's important to note that none of us on these boards really know where the price comes from and what for. Does Apple want to reduce the cost of music but the music labels wont allow it? Do the music labels want to reduce the price of music but Apple refuse?
Certainly the recent deals in dropping DRM has proven that Apple never wanted DRM and removed it as soon as it was legal to do so, after taking steps to convince and bribe the music labels to make dropping it legal.
Quite a trade-off. It means that everytime I lose my iPad, bang, I lose my library.
You wouldn't lose your library everytime you lost your iPad (although expecting to lose an iPad multiple times probably means you should never consider one). Your books would be backed up to your computer from your itunes syncs. Time Machine could then back those files up again on an external hard drive, and you could even keep a hard drive backup outside of your home or utilize on online backup service. Electronic copies allow for far more redundancy than a physical copy, if you leave your book somewhere, it is gone, if your house burns down your entire library is gone (to be fair, that would probably be the least of your concerns). That doesn't have to be the case with digital versions.
I find it really amazing that people can somehow twist the ability to carry your entire library with you into a disadvantage. There are reasons to buy physical books, but protecting books from loss is not one of them.
Even $10 for an e-book is high, I think. There is no printing cost, little distribution cost, less-costly promotion because Amazon and Apple will do a lot of the promoting; plus, social media makes promoting much less expensive these days.
I think the only way to justify higher prices would be to include extra material, like videos or other things that may be expensive to produce.
It's not about price. It's about control over price. MacMillan saw that Amazon was using low ebook prices as a means to promote Kindle and they realized that a customer base addicted to cheap books is bad for their (MacMillan's) long term business. Just ask GM, Ford & Chrysler about rebates.
Oh yes they will try raising the price of ebooks but, the record company idiots notwithstanding, anyone who thinks a publisher will keep books overpriced well into its own corporate demise reveals an astonishing lack of common sense. Of course they'll try to feel out higher prices, if it sticks and piracy doesn't rise, then they'll stay with it. If it doesn't, then they won't.
"things have to cost money or people won't (can't) make them."
-exactly
@pmz, @Tonyflo: I agree. The only people who want to pay nothing for content are people who've never produced any themselves.
-Don't know if I exactly agree with MacMillan's price points, as I think the public does understand some of the reduced costs.
But goddammit, every time I hear of some broke-a$$ 16-year-old Klepto-Communist talking about how he's entitled to free content, and how he's going to try to steal something that I worked on for 2 years, I feel like cutting off the li'l f'er's head with a samurai sword.
How about this, you can steal all the content you want if you work 9-5 40h/wk job making at least $50k, but return all your paychecks and agree to work for free in exchange for the privilege. The idea of stealing from someone whose work you think is good enough to steal in the first place boggles the frakking mind.
You pay the ones you love to keep them in business.
How about this, you can steal all the content you want if you work 9-5 40h/wk job making at least $50k, but return all your paychecks and agree to work for free in exchange for the privilege.
Sounds like a good idea to me, if everyone did this, it wouldn't be perfect, but nothing is. Maybe I misunderstand the concept of Communism but that sounds like it, would it be so bad?
Books that cost $26 in stores, will cost half that on iBooks and Amazon. HALF. Its the same BOOK! No you can't lug it around, or ruin in with your hands, or re-sell it (only downfall of ebooks), or keep it and stare it on your shelf.
Excuse my French, but it's BS!
What books are talking about? Let's go to NY Times site and see the top bestsellers
Hardcover Fiction
1. THE HELP, by Kathryn Stockett - $9.50 hardcover at Amazon, $13.72 at Borders
Hardcover Nonfiction
1. GAME CHANGE, by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin - $13.00 hardcover at Amazon, $15.39 at Borders
Paperback Trade Fiction
1. THE LOVELY BONES, by Alice Sebold - $12.83 hardcover at Amazon, $10.79 at Borders
And sharing books is an issue! Nook reader from Barnes and Nobles will allow some kind of sharing. But if I buy a printed book I can share it with my family, my friends without limitation. I'd like to see if Apple provide any mechanism that will allow us to share e-books
And honestly, regardless of the savings that comes from not having to print and physically distribute the books, the content of a great book is still an amazing value at $12.99 - $14.99. There are so many books I've read that have changed my life, and if we continually push them to basement prices ... we devalue what authors do, and will ultimately starve a group of creatives who brings us ideas and content that greatly enhances our lives.
Stop talking out of your ass. There's simply no way to justify that price. It's a file, it downloads in 10 seconds, and it should be priced accordingly. It's not a "real book" whatever way you try and spin it. Even eye strain alone should bring down cost. If the publishing industry ever expect books on the iPad, or any other device "to take off" the need to rethink their pricing: "DRAMATICALLY". New releases or bestsellers should be $9.99, and all other books should be $6.99.
You see, the thing they fail to see is pricing books at this sort of price point (7-10 bucks) would get people who read books buying more books, and it would get people who don't buy any books reading books. They don't have to cut down trees, they don't have to ship the books all over the planet, and they don't have to print the bloody things. Rest assured this is saving them money.
These publishers lack the vision, intelligence and foresight to see the obvious. They are sitting on money. This "instant books" industry would be "HUGE" if the price was right. I'd say even at those prices they'd make more money, possibly quite a bit more than currently. The books can't even be resold.
Comments
But seriously folks, the 30% to 50% increase in price for a nascent category does not bode well for mass acceptance. Time will tell.
Well, it will keep me from buying them.... It seems if you cut out the cost of printing, warehousing, shipping to retailers, the retailers cost of stocking, selling then the prices should be cheaper than what they are now. The only thing that keeps from using e-books full time is the costs are incrementally cheaper with a steep reduction in benefits. I only buy Kindle books (for the iPhone) if I can't make it to a store beforehand.
Here's the article about it in the NYTimes.
What I can't understand is that under the new arrangement, Amazon will get 30% of the proceeds from ebooks, whereas previously they had been purchasing rights wholesale from the publisher for half list price, and selling the ebooks at a loss. Now Amazon will be making more and Macmillan less, according to the Times' math. So how is this a loss for Amazon?
"Book publishers, meanwhile, are volunteering to limit their digital profits. In the model that Amazon prefers, publishers typically collect $12.50 to $17.50 for new e-books. Under the new agency model, publishers will typically make $9 to $10.50 on new digital editions."
I think Macmillan's win is that they can determine what the market price for a book will be, which by their own statements won't simply be more but determined by the individual book.
Also I think this is to stop Amazon from setting themselves up as a Publisher and make the relationship more of an Agency one.
I'll be happy to explain. Amazon was never interested in making money off the ebooks they sell. They were interested in:
1. Being the cheapest and most convenient medium.
2. Selling you an insanely over priced Kindle.
3. Selling you a hundred dollars worth of crap you didn't come to Amazon to buy, because your subconscious is sucking in the 500 products on each page that Amazon somehow knows you really want.
Let's rewrite that (CAPITALIZATIONS are mine):
I'll be happy to explain. APPLE was never interested in making money off the APPS/MUSIC/VIDEOS they sell. They were interested in:
1. Being the cheapest and most convenient medium.
That would be iTunes which bizarrely plays my music and videos while also syncing my calendar, contacts, and e-mail to my iPhone and offers to sell me music (by the track!), bonus content, videos and apps all in the same application and also activated my iPhone when I bought it! And its FREE!
2. Selling you an insanely over priced IPOD/IPHONE.
A device with a 60% profit margin! None of the savings are passed on to you! http://venturebeat.com/2009/07/29/at...to-60-percent/ (or the original article at http://financial-alchemist.blogspot....bstantial.html)
3. Selling you a hundred dollars worth of crap you didn't come to THE ITUNES STORE to buy, because your subconscious is sucking in the 500 products on each page that THE ITUNES STORE somehow knows you really want.
Damn iTunes "Recommendations for you"! and that crazy "Genius" thing! Yeah, well, my massive iPhone app catalog is my own fault actually.
When you're trying to criticized Apple's online content distribution prices..
As someone already pointed out, this discussion was about eBook prices not music, TV shows or movies.
But lets see...
...its very easy to ignore the fact that THEY are sole reason we have $0.69 - $1.29 songs, and $1.99 tv shows. Not to mention $4.99 movies that are not new releases.
But I guess those prices are too high for you.
When it comes to music, I very rarely purchase anything from iTunes. Why? Because I buy whole albums and they can ALWAYS be found cheaper some place other than iTunes. Either via Amazon's mp3 store, Amazon's regular store or a local retailer. The only music that gets purchased from iTunes now are songs that are exclusive to the store. Also, please point me to the $0.69 songs on iTunes. The selection is so small as to be practically non-existent (and consists of content very few people ever consider purchasing). The same goes for any song under $0.99.
I also never buy TV shows from iTunes. Why? Because I'm stuck playing them in Apple-only devices. I generally never buy digital downloads of TV shows anyhow, but if I were I'd buy them from Amazon's On Demand service. Why? Because I have a choice of devices to watch them on (including the TiVo I already own instead of having to buy an AppleTV to have a decent TV viewing experience). If I want to own a season, I'll buy it on DVD or Blu-Ray because it can ALWAYS be found cheaper than iTunes (for DVD) or in the case of BR the quality is better than iTunes (or any other legal download service).
And movies are the same situation as TV shows. Stuck tied to Apple-only devices. Thanks but no thanks to the lack of choice. And at $4.99, some of those movies would be cheaper to buy on DVD than RENT on iTunes.
Apple shaking things up again eh!!!
If by "up" you mean "upwards", as in helping to get the book dealers better deals and charging the end user more then you're correct. Amazon wanted to charge less, but because of Apple they no longer can. It's indirectly Apple's fault.
Let's be honest--for a digital book $13 to $15 is just wrong. The publishers should have the sense to go with the $9.99 model and sell many more books. In the long run I'd reckon they'd make "A LOT" more money. Less profit per book, sure, but a price point that would get many-an-iPad-owner in to the buying book 'habit'. You see they just see the price and their business sense ends there. I'd say I'd eventually buy an iPad but I won't be buying books at those prices, and not many will.
This is going to cause books to become third(or fourth) in pirated stuff after movies and music and/or software.
What is even more ridiculous is how these prices are pretty much based on hardcover prices. When distribution costs for e-books is only a fraction of that for a normal book.
Oh well. Maybe someday, these morons will learn.
I believe those who are disparaging Apple don't really understand how little best-selling authors make -- and how much Amazon was further limiting the compensation writers (and publishers) make from their books.
Until the pressure from iPad forced Amazon to change their compensation structure, Amazon was taking a whopping 70% of the sale from $9.99 e-books sold for the Kindle. That leaves a pitiful amount of money available for the publishers ... and even less for the authors who slave away to write great books.
(Many best-selling authors cannot even afford to write full time -- they must have another job in order to make ends meet.)
Under the new Apple 70-30 compensation structure (where the seller only takes 30%) that Amazon was forced to adopt in response ... the publishers/authors will make as much as $10.50 cents for every $15.00 e-book sold. This will make things much more sustainable for writing and publishing industries, and ultimately lead to better work.
And honestly, regardless of the savings that comes from not having to print and physically distribute the books, the content of a great book is still an amazing value at $12.99 - $14.99. There are so many books I've read that have changed my life, and if we continually push them to basement prices ... we devalue what authors do, and will ultimately starve a group of creatives who brings us ideas and content that greatly enhances our lives.
I'm all for conscious capitalism and fair free markets, but kudos to Apple for a) creating a new device that will facilitate more e-book sales .... b) dramatically enhance the reading experience (my opinion, based on what I've seen from the iPad's book app) ... and c) help better compensate dying publishers and struggling writers so that their industry, craft and contribution can grow.
I don't believe Steve Jobs is "saving" the publishing industry, but he is definitely helping it -- even if he is causing consumers to pay slightly more for information that is well worth the price.
That's my two cents.
Tony
As someone already pointed out, this discussion was about eBook prices not music, TV shows or movies.
But lets see...
When it comes to music, I very rarely purchase anything from iTunes. Why? Because I buy whole albums and they can ALWAYS be found cheaper some place other than iTunes. Either via Amazon's mp3 store, Amazon's regular store or a local retailer. The only music that gets purchased from iTunes now are songs that are exclusive to the store. Also, please point me to the $0.69 songs on iTunes. The selection is so small as to be practically non-existent (and consists of content very few people ever consider purchasing). The same goes for any song under $0.99.
I also never buy TV shows from iTunes. Why? Because I'm stuck playing them in Apple-only devices. I generally never buy digital downloads of TV shows anyhow, but if I were I'd buy them from Amazon's On Demand service. Why? Because I have a choice of devices to watch them on (including the TiVo I already own instead of having to buy an AppleTV to have a decent TV viewing experience). If I want to own a season, I'll buy it on DVD or Blu-Ray because it can ALWAYS be found cheaper than iTunes (for DVD) or in the case of BR the quality is better than iTunes (or any other legal download service).
And movies are the same situation as TV shows. Stuck tied to Apple-only devices. Thanks but no thanks to the lack of choice. And at $4.99, some of those movies would be cheaper to buy on DVD than RENT on iTunes.
I agree with all that and I'd add that I've been burned lately by apple's DRM on its music. Non-MP3 format is annoying to me right now, and I've hit the limit of machines i can authorize with the stuff i've paid for. In the end, I'd rather buy a CD and rip it.
{fanboi}I'm GLAD the price of ebooks is going up, so that the authors will bring us more and more ebooks! Way to go Macmillan! {/fanboi}
n/m. Don't feed the trolls.
I agree with all that and I'd add that I've been burned lately by apple's DRM on its music. Non-MP3 format is annoying to me right now, and I've hit the limit of machines i can authorize with the stuff i've paid for. In the end, I'd rather buy a CD and rip it.
If you wish to play the songs you bought on iTunes on devices that don't use the apple format ACC then, in iTunes, select all the songs you want converted and ask iTunes to convert them into MP3, pretty much everything can play MP3.
I've just tested it so I know that works. Also, it is my understanding that as DRM has been removed from iTunes bough music (the price for this from the music companies was variable pricing) you can now do what you want with your music.
You can for example, in iTunes, select all of your music, convert it to MP3, then drag and drop the whole lot into a folder on your desktop and move it else where.
On the point of pricing and DRM it's important to note that none of us on these boards really know where the price comes from and what for. Does Apple want to reduce the cost of music but the music labels wont allow it? Do the music labels want to reduce the price of music but Apple refuse?
Certainly the recent deals in dropping DRM has proven that Apple never wanted DRM and removed it as soon as it was legal to do so, after taking steps to convince and bribe the music labels to make dropping it legal.
LOL Amazon is run from Cupertino.
Win.
Really hope this was sarcastic comment, since you making me very nervous thinking increased prices indirectly by Apple is win.
Quite a trade-off. It means that everytime I lose my iPad, bang, I lose my library.
You wouldn't lose your library everytime you lost your iPad (although expecting to lose an iPad multiple times probably means you should never consider one). Your books would be backed up to your computer from your itunes syncs. Time Machine could then back those files up again on an external hard drive, and you could even keep a hard drive backup outside of your home or utilize on online backup service. Electronic copies allow for far more redundancy than a physical copy, if you leave your book somewhere, it is gone, if your house burns down your entire library is gone (to be fair, that would probably be the least of your concerns). That doesn't have to be the case with digital versions.
I find it really amazing that people can somehow twist the ability to carry your entire library with you into a disadvantage. There are reasons to buy physical books, but protecting books from loss is not one of them.
I think the only way to justify higher prices would be to include extra material, like videos or other things that may be expensive to produce.
Oh yes they will try raising the price of ebooks but, the record company idiots notwithstanding, anyone who thinks a publisher will keep books overpriced well into its own corporate demise reveals an astonishing lack of common sense. Of course they'll try to feel out higher prices, if it sticks and piracy doesn't rise, then they'll stay with it. If it doesn't, then they won't.
-exactly
@pmz, @Tonyflo: I agree. The only people who want to pay nothing for content are people who've never produced any themselves.
-Don't know if I exactly agree with MacMillan's price points, as I think the public does understand some of the reduced costs.
But goddammit, every time I hear of some broke-a$$ 16-year-old Klepto-Communist talking about how he's entitled to free content, and how he's going to try to steal something that I worked on for 2 years, I feel like cutting off the li'l f'er's head with a samurai sword.
How about this, you can steal all the content you want if you work 9-5 40h/wk job making at least $50k, but return all your paychecks and agree to work for free in exchange for the privilege. The idea of stealing from someone whose work you think is good enough to steal in the first place boggles the frakking mind.
You pay the ones you love to keep them in business.
How about this, you can steal all the content you want if you work 9-5 40h/wk job making at least $50k, but return all your paychecks and agree to work for free in exchange for the privilege.
Sounds like a good idea to me, if everyone did this, it wouldn't be perfect, but nothing is. Maybe I misunderstand the concept of Communism but that sounds like it, would it be so bad?
Books that cost $26 in stores, will cost half that on iBooks and Amazon. HALF. Its the same BOOK! No you can't lug it around, or ruin in with your hands, or re-sell it (only downfall of ebooks), or keep it and stare it on your shelf.
Excuse my French, but it's BS!
What books are talking about? Let's go to NY Times site and see the top bestsellers
Hardcover Fiction
1. THE HELP, by Kathryn Stockett - $9.50 hardcover at Amazon, $13.72 at Borders
Hardcover Nonfiction
1. GAME CHANGE, by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin - $13.00 hardcover at Amazon, $15.39 at Borders
Paperback Trade Fiction
1. THE LOVELY BONES, by Alice Sebold - $12.83 hardcover at Amazon, $10.79 at Borders
What are the ... $26 you talking about?
And sharing books is an issue! Nook reader from Barnes and Nobles will allow some kind of sharing. But if I buy a printed book I can share it with my family, my friends without limitation. I'd like to see if Apple provide any mechanism that will allow us to share e-books
And honestly, regardless of the savings that comes from not having to print and physically distribute the books, the content of a great book is still an amazing value at $12.99 - $14.99. There are so many books I've read that have changed my life, and if we continually push them to basement prices ... we devalue what authors do, and will ultimately starve a group of creatives who brings us ideas and content that greatly enhances our lives.
Stop talking out of your ass. There's simply no way to justify that price. It's a file, it downloads in 10 seconds, and it should be priced accordingly. It's not a "real book" whatever way you try and spin it. Even eye strain alone should bring down cost. If the publishing industry ever expect books on the iPad, or any other device "to take off" the need to rethink their pricing: "DRAMATICALLY". New releases or bestsellers should be $9.99, and all other books should be $6.99.
You see, the thing they fail to see is pricing books at this sort of price point (7-10 bucks) would get people who read books buying more books, and it would get people who don't buy any books reading books. They don't have to cut down trees, they don't have to ship the books all over the planet, and they don't have to print the bloody things. Rest assured this is saving them money.
These publishers lack the vision, intelligence and foresight to see the obvious. They are sitting on money. This "instant books" industry would be "HUGE" if the price was right. I'd say even at those prices they'd make more money, possibly quite a bit more than currently. The books can't even be resold.