I simply don't understand why an eBook should cost more than the paperback equivalent??? I would think that an eBook should cost the same as a paperback if not significantly less. I mean, there is no physical book to print and distribute. Electronic distribution is obviously MUCH more cost effective.
I would love to buy eBooks, but there are very few instances when I would be willing to pay the upcharge just to have a specific novel on my phone or tablet.
*could* be that for an electronic distribution you have to have server space online 24x7 just in case someone may download a copy and pay for bandwidth to delivery it - while a physical book only needs to ship once and then it is on the bookstore or news stand to pay for the shelf space and lights and personnel etc to try to sell it. plus - when distributing physical media the product is paid for up front by the retailer whereas for electronic dist no $ comes in until a copy is actually purchased. Of course there are likely far more credits back for unsold books (and magazines etc) in the physical distribution channel than in the electronic channel.
Overall the point is that the cost of doing business under one model may have wildly different components and unit prices and vagaries of market value of those components (cost of gas vs cost of internet service for example) does not mean that one is necessarily better or worse than the other. It would *seem* that electronic distribution would be able to achieve economies of scale and reach a wider audience that physical distribution - and that the cost to deliver 1000 copies would only be nominally higher than delivering a single copy in the electronic world - and that you could reach places that would other wise be prohibitively expensive or would add shipping cost to physical media.
Or I suppose the overall point is - that unless someone here actually knows real numbers for each supply chain - then we are all just speculating.
Comments
How does that work? If you estimate sales of 100,000, why would it matter if many more or none more are copied?
Because if the book is copied, instead of selling 100,000, they may only sell 50,000.
apple could charge 1/half of what it charges today and still make a profit .
except the other concerned parties don't want apple to under cut them .
9
Bruce, you know this, how?
I simply don't understand why an eBook should cost more than the paperback equivalent??? I would think that an eBook should cost the same as a paperback if not significantly less. I mean, there is no physical book to print and distribute. Electronic distribution is obviously MUCH more cost effective.
I would love to buy eBooks, but there are very few instances when I would be willing to pay the upcharge just to have a specific novel on my phone or tablet.
*could* be that for an electronic distribution you have to have server space online 24x7 just in case someone may download a copy and pay for bandwidth to delivery it - while a physical book only needs to ship once and then it is on the bookstore or news stand to pay for the shelf space and lights and personnel etc to try to sell it. plus - when distributing physical media the product is paid for up front by the retailer whereas for electronic dist no $ comes in until a copy is actually purchased. Of course there are likely far more credits back for unsold books (and magazines etc) in the physical distribution channel than in the electronic channel.
Overall the point is that the cost of doing business under one model may have wildly different components and unit prices and vagaries of market value of those components (cost of gas vs cost of internet service for example) does not mean that one is necessarily better or worse than the other. It would *seem* that electronic distribution would be able to achieve economies of scale and reach a wider audience that physical distribution - and that the cost to deliver 1000 copies would only be nominally higher than delivering a single copy in the electronic world - and that you could reach places that would other wise be prohibitively expensive or would add shipping cost to physical media.
Or I suppose the overall point is - that unless someone here actually knows real numbers for each supply chain - then we are all just speculating.