This week, The New York Times provided a breakdown on the economics of producing a book from the publisher's perspective. It noted that while printing costs go away when a book is reproduced in an electronic format, a number of expenses remain, including royalties and marketing.
I wonder how many actually read the whole article before they commented?
I also wonder why some people here dis every article that AppleInsider publishes. Fortunately, I would like to ignore them. However, it is virtually impossible to do so, as long as somebody else responds to their trolling, the crap still shows up.
To answer my own question, I have a feeling that they don't, primarily because they can't.
"Out of that gross revenue, the publisher pays about 50 cents to convert the text to a digital file, typeset it in digital form and copy-edit it," the report said.
this sentence makes no sense to me.... it takes 50 cent's from each digital copy sold to "convert the text to digital file"?
what? bullshit. I imagine these books are digital ALREADY, and even if there are conversion and reformatting costs to get it into an ebook format, I find it highly unlikely it is anywhere close to the cost of formatting a book for print.
That's oversimplifying the issue. You can't simply lease less and less of a building, and that's assuming the publishers don't own their own, which would make it even more difficult.
And where do you get the "pay more". I see the numbers as "pay less".
Warehouse space can be sold or reduced. Sure, it takes a couple years, but it can be done. It's not like they are locked into these leases into eternity. I know this because I am both a landlord and I operate a wholesale business which has grown and shrunk. It's a tremendous pain in the ass and it takes a landlord that is willing to work with you. But you always have the option of moving out (or selling, if you own it).
When I say pay more, it refers to paying more than the current 9.99 Amazon price.
I would have to ask the question: If you were getting by just fine on $9.99 prior to the iPad rollout, then what is the excuse to claim the additional $4 bucks is needed, except to gouge the customer?
If it wasn't profitable, they wouldn't be selling it, even at $9.99.
Because it wasn't $9.99. Amazon was sucking up the difference and taking a loss in order to dominate the eBook market. The expectation was that the other ebook vendors would go broke trying to match Amazon's pricing because they didn't have the revenue streams that Amazon has from non-books.
In the end, there has got to be some leveling out of symbiosis between print and digital. I see the huge benefits for both the educational and the general public markets for consuming information - but I find it difficult to get past the idea that digital will ever replace paper for the majority of how the world absorbs and communicates information (outside of the tech savvy niches we are a part of) ... until a day comes when we all stop grabbing sticks, pencils, pens, crayons etc. to scratch down our thoughts.
As I become more in tune with the potential the iPad represents, I wonder about the gap in a person's/state's/ country's ability to access & process information that will grow between the ol' class battles we've been dealing with for centuries.
I am a long-time fan and customer of Apple products and I'm just worried that the further (and faster) we reach into the future, a growing chunk of the planet will remain in the past. It's not a simple matter of producing the latest and greatest electronic gadget, I think that the iPad represents a paradigm shift in learning and communication - a much bigger issue that'll get tons of scrutiny over the coming years.
Aside from Apple's Green initiatives of late, maybe it's time to direct a slice of their war chest toward classic literacy and learning initiatives.
Wow, I had no idea I was gonna head in this direction when I clicked 'Reply'...
Sorry, I didn't notice where he lives. I'm sure he is paying what he says!
If the publisher makes $4.05, less office space and electricity, when a hardcover bestseller is sold at $26, what do they make when it is sold for $10 to $15. They are not losing money!
I'll shut up now...
Even publishers lose money on books. And no, I've never seen a new hardcover selling for $10 to $15 outside of Costco, which does sell them at no profit, or even a small loss. And as I mentioned, Costco usually gets book club editions, which are cheaper.
I dont know where you guys are coming up with those numbers. Where did you EVER buy a new hardcover for $10 outside of a Costco or other buying club?
You really need to give a real answer, because you can't simply pull numbers like that out of nowhere.
I would have to ask the question: If you were getting by just fine on $9.99 prior to the iPad rollout, then what is the excuse to claim the additional $4 bucks is needed, except to gouge the customer?
If it wasn't profitable, they wouldn't be selling it, even at $9.99.
Not true. Amazon was selling books at a loss to get more sales of the Kindle, and to apparently in an attempt to, at sometime in the future, get publishers to accept less. Also, at least 80% of the books they were selling were free.
As Amazon has never given any information out about actual numbers of Kindles sold, or e-books sold, or the average price of e-books sold, the assumption has been that they are taking a big beating on it. They constantly refuse to answer any questions on the subject.
In the end, there has got to be some leveling out of symbiosis between print and digital. I see the huge benefits for both the educational and the general public markets for consuming information - but I find it difficult to get past the idea that digital will ever replace paper for the majority of how the world absorbs and communicates information (outside of the tech savvy niches we are a part of) ... until a day comes when we all stop grabbing sticks, pencils, pens, crayons etc. to scratch down our thoughts.
I completely disagree. When you look at the evolution of consumer consumption of media, you see a overarching trend towards digital delivery.
Newspapers are getting destroyed because people aren't paying for printed content anymore. And they are having trouble monetizing the internet distribution model. But it is moving towards an internet distribution model whether they like it or not.
With books, the power is concentrated in a smaller number of publishers. The iBook store will lower the entry costs to get into the publishing game. The number of devices ready to accept e-books is not at critical mass yet. But with the introduction of new Kindle models and the iPad, it has the potential to get there.
My guess: as the iPad and Kindle start to gain in popularity, e-Books will start to become the main delivery method of books to consumers, just as digital audio is the main delivery method of music. You'll see smaller, newer, more nimble publishers as the barriers to entry (cost of printing machines, warehouses, distribution networks) start to come down. And the death of the bookstore like we've seen the death of the music store.
And all of it is a good thing. It's more efficient, its cheaper for the consumer, and it provides in most cases a better experience.
Why would any publisher charge significantly less for their e-books? Because the cost of production is cheaper? Is buying an album on iTunes that much cheaper than buying a CD? No, in fact I can usually find the CD on sale at the same price or $1 more. Why would anyone expect e-books to be drastically different than music downloads? You save a buck or two on an e-book, and with sale pricing I'm sure consumers will pay even less. Last year we found out Apple's profit margins for the iPhone are around 60%, no one questions why Apple doesn't bring down the price. If the demand is there - why in the world would you?
This is simple: the market will decide. Publishers can charge whatever they want, its up to the consumer to buy.
They do, because the ones that make big money, make really BIG money. That goes to finance other movies, and the hope is that the average will end up as a profit.
Warehouse space can be sold or reduced. Sure, it takes a couple years, but it can be done. It's not like they are locked into these leases into eternity. I know this because I am both a landlord and I operate a wholesale business which has grown and shrunk. It's a tremendous pain in the ass and it takes a landlord that is willing to work with you. But you always have the option of moving out (or selling, if you own it).
When I say pay more, it refers to paying more than the current 9.99 Amazon price.
You lease warehouses for years at a time. Those leases can be twenty years long. And many companies in businesses like that own their own.
In these days of depreciating building markets, most landlords are not going to be that easy bout allowing companies out of long term leases made when times were looking up. At the very least, the penalty would be large. I know the business from the other end. My first company went from leasing space to buying our own building, and my second leased several floors.
Besides, this will be a deterioration of conditions that will take place over years. There may be no point in which a company will be able to let go of a specified amount of space until years have gone by. You can't release 5% of your space at a time. You know it doesn't work that way.
I really don't care what a publisher's fixed costs are. If I like or want the book, I'll buy it regardless of price. Just don't trot out a bunch of bull justifying these inflated prices for e-books when common sense would tell anyone that the price of a physical book is going to be higher than an electronic version, but an electronic version 'near' the price of a physical book... baloney!
Actually if the iPad had and rentals and the DRM to enforce it wouldn't be so bad, because rental prices are cheaper than buying and there is ALWAYS a way around DRM schemes.
I wonder if one could scan a iPad screen like a paper book? OCR the results?
Just hold home and lock and take a screenshot. Pirating E-Books is going to probably be the easiest thing even on the iPad, and if the screenshot capabilities are removed, then I'm sure someone will make a jailbreak app that does it easier and faster. Sucks for anyone who's trying to make money,but you're right, theres always a way around DRM, and especially when it's something you just look at.
I wonder how many actually read the whole article before they commented?
I also wonder why some people here dis every article that AppleInsider publishes. Fortunately, I would like to ignore them. However, it is virtually impossible to do so, as long as somebody else responds to their trolling, the crap still shows up.
To answer my own question, I have a feeling that they don't, primarily because they can't.
If a well known author really wanted to make some money, they'd hire their own editor, PR team, typesetter, graphic designer, etc. and simply sell direct to the public via iTunes. I got the impression that an author like Dan Brown already has some kind of production team or cross-promotional sharing agreement, if you saw him on the Today Show promoting his last book it seemed like he was there all week.
What will keep the star authors from taking their books direct to iTunes? Nothing except for long term or exclusive contracts.
You lease warehouses for years at a time. Those leases can be twenty years long. And many companies in businesses like that own their own.
In these days of depreciating building markets, most landlords are not going to be that easy bout allowing companies out of long term leases made when times were looking up. At the very least, the penalty would be large. I know the business from the other end. My first company went from leasing space to buying our own building, and my second leased several floors.
Besides, this will be a deterioration of conditions that will take place over years. There may be no point in which a company will be able to let go of a specified amount of space until years have gone by. You can't release 5% of your space at a time. You know it doesn't work that way.
Still, there are other options such as sub-leasing. If you own your own warehose, you have the flexibility of selling the warehouse.
Sure, if you have only 10,000 sf of warehouse space, you won't be able to reduce your space by 500 sf But if you are a large publisher and have 1,000,000 sf of warehouse space, you can definately reduce your space by 50,000 sf.
Rent is ridiculously cheap anyways. It's the labor involved with distribution that is expensive. And that can be cut at a moment's notice.
I tink a lot of what sites like that write as mostly BS. While there's fraud in every business, and just think of how many times you got something you should have paid for, but didn't, the fact till remains that most movies lose money.
All you have to do is look at the top ten listings. You'll see some pretty big budget movies sinking the second week into irrelevancy. In fact, many big budget movies do that the first week. What happens then?
If a well known author really wanted to make some money, they'd hire their own editor, PR team, typesetter, graphic designer, etc. and simply sell direct to the public via iTunes. I got the impression that an author like Dan Brown already has some kind of production team or cross-promotional sharing agreement, if you saw him on the Today Show promoting his last book it seemed like he was there all week.
What will keep the star authors from taking their books direct to iTunes? Nothing except for long term or exclusive contracts.
Once the ipad/kindle become as ubiquitous as the ipod, I could see this happening. I could even see a low-cost small publisher merely providing the service of putting the book up on iTunes.
The report said that while the average hardcover bestseller is $26, the cost to print, store and ship the book is just $3.25. That cost also includes unsold copies returned to the publisher by booksellers.
Now there will be zero returned/unsold books.
Quote:
"Out of that gross revenue, the publisher pays about 50 cents to convert the text to a digital file, typeset it in digital form and copy-edit it," the report said.
This is done one time, regardless of how many copies are sold.
Copy-edit will take the most time/effort though this cost should have been included before the "printing".
Not true. Amazon was selling books at a loss to get more sales of the Kindle, and to apparently in an attempt to, at sometime in the future, get publishers to accept less. Also, at least 80% of the books they were selling were free.
As Amazon has never given any information out about actual numbers of Kindles sold, or e-books sold, or the average price of e-books sold, the assumption has been that they are taking a big beating on it. They constantly refuse to answer any questions on the subject.
So no one can actually show any proof that Amazon is taking a loss, yet no one seems to question this?
Comments
This week, The New York Times provided a breakdown on the economics of producing a book from the publisher's perspective. It noted that while printing costs go away when a book is reproduced in an electronic format, a number of expenses remain, including royalties and marketing.
I wonder how many actually read the whole article before they commented? I also wonder why some people here dis every article that AppleInsider publishes. Fortunately, I would like to ignore them. However, it is virtually impossible to do so, as long as somebody else responds to their trolling, the crap still shows up.
To answer my own question, I have a feeling that they don't, primarily because they can't.
"Out of that gross revenue, the publisher pays about 50 cents to convert the text to a digital file, typeset it in digital form and copy-edit it," the report said.
this sentence makes no sense to me.... it takes 50 cent's from each digital copy sold to "convert the text to digital file"?
what? bullshit. I imagine these books are digital ALREADY, and even if there are conversion and reformatting costs to get it into an ebook format, I find it highly unlikely it is anywhere close to the cost of formatting a book for print.
That's oversimplifying the issue. You can't simply lease less and less of a building, and that's assuming the publishers don't own their own, which would make it even more difficult.
And where do you get the "pay more". I see the numbers as "pay less".
Warehouse space can be sold or reduced. Sure, it takes a couple years, but it can be done. It's not like they are locked into these leases into eternity. I know this because I am both a landlord and I operate a wholesale business which has grown and shrunk. It's a tremendous pain in the ass and it takes a landlord that is willing to work with you. But you always have the option of moving out (or selling, if you own it).
When I say pay more, it refers to paying more than the current 9.99 Amazon price.
I would have to ask the question: If you were getting by just fine on $9.99 prior to the iPad rollout, then what is the excuse to claim the additional $4 bucks is needed, except to gouge the customer?
If it wasn't profitable, they wouldn't be selling it, even at $9.99.
Because it wasn't $9.99. Amazon was sucking up the difference and taking a loss in order to dominate the eBook market. The expectation was that the other ebook vendors would go broke trying to match Amazon's pricing because they didn't have the revenue streams that Amazon has from non-books.
As I become more in tune with the potential the iPad represents, I wonder about the gap in a person's/state's/ country's ability to access & process information that will grow between the ol' class battles we've been dealing with for centuries.
I am a long-time fan and customer of Apple products and I'm just worried that the further (and faster) we reach into the future, a growing chunk of the planet will remain in the past. It's not a simple matter of producing the latest and greatest electronic gadget, I think that the iPad represents a paradigm shift in learning and communication - a much bigger issue that'll get tons of scrutiny over the coming years.
Aside from Apple's Green initiatives of late, maybe it's time to direct a slice of their war chest toward classic literacy and learning initiatives.
Wow, I had no idea I was gonna head in this direction when I clicked 'Reply'...
Sorry, I didn't notice where he lives. I'm sure he is paying what he says!
If the publisher makes $4.05, less office space and electricity, when a hardcover bestseller is sold at $26, what do they make when it is sold for $10 to $15. They are not losing money!
I'll shut up now...
Even publishers lose money on books. And no, I've never seen a new hardcover selling for $10 to $15 outside of Costco, which does sell them at no profit, or even a small loss. And as I mentioned, Costco usually gets book club editions, which are cheaper.
I dont know where you guys are coming up with those numbers. Where did you EVER buy a new hardcover for $10 outside of a Costco or other buying club?
You really need to give a real answer, because you can't simply pull numbers like that out of nowhere.
AND THAT $1.28 IS INFLATED or EVEN BOGUS!
Please prove that to us, as you seen to know.
I would have to ask the question: If you were getting by just fine on $9.99 prior to the iPad rollout, then what is the excuse to claim the additional $4 bucks is needed, except to gouge the customer?
If it wasn't profitable, they wouldn't be selling it, even at $9.99.
Not true. Amazon was selling books at a loss to get more sales of the Kindle, and to apparently in an attempt to, at sometime in the future, get publishers to accept less. Also, at least 80% of the books they were selling were free.
As Amazon has never given any information out about actual numbers of Kindles sold, or e-books sold, or the average price of e-books sold, the assumption has been that they are taking a big beating on it. They constantly refuse to answer any questions on the subject.
In the end, there has got to be some leveling out of symbiosis between print and digital. I see the huge benefits for both the educational and the general public markets for consuming information - but I find it difficult to get past the idea that digital will ever replace paper for the majority of how the world absorbs and communicates information (outside of the tech savvy niches we are a part of) ... until a day comes when we all stop grabbing sticks, pencils, pens, crayons etc. to scratch down our thoughts.
I completely disagree. When you look at the evolution of consumer consumption of media, you see a overarching trend towards digital delivery.
Newspapers are getting destroyed because people aren't paying for printed content anymore. And they are having trouble monetizing the internet distribution model. But it is moving towards an internet distribution model whether they like it or not.
With books, the power is concentrated in a smaller number of publishers. The iBook store will lower the entry costs to get into the publishing game. The number of devices ready to accept e-books is not at critical mass yet. But with the introduction of new Kindle models and the iPad, it has the potential to get there.
My guess: as the iPad and Kindle start to gain in popularity, e-Books will start to become the main delivery method of books to consumers, just as digital audio is the main delivery method of music. You'll see smaller, newer, more nimble publishers as the barriers to entry (cost of printing machines, warehouses, distribution networks) start to come down. And the death of the bookstore like we've seen the death of the music store.
And all of it is a good thing. It's more efficient, its cheaper for the consumer, and it provides in most cases a better experience.
This is simple: the market will decide. Publishers can charge whatever they want, its up to the consumer to buy.
They do, because the ones that make big money, make really BIG money. That goes to finance other movies, and the hope is that the average will end up as a profit.
Right.
http://screencrave.com/2009-04-14/bl...to-make-money/
Warehouse space can be sold or reduced. Sure, it takes a couple years, but it can be done. It's not like they are locked into these leases into eternity. I know this because I am both a landlord and I operate a wholesale business which has grown and shrunk. It's a tremendous pain in the ass and it takes a landlord that is willing to work with you. But you always have the option of moving out (or selling, if you own it).
When I say pay more, it refers to paying more than the current 9.99 Amazon price.
You lease warehouses for years at a time. Those leases can be twenty years long. And many companies in businesses like that own their own.
In these days of depreciating building markets, most landlords are not going to be that easy bout allowing companies out of long term leases made when times were looking up. At the very least, the penalty would be large. I know the business from the other end. My first company went from leasing space to buying our own building, and my second leased several floors.
Besides, this will be a deterioration of conditions that will take place over years. There may be no point in which a company will be able to let go of a specified amount of space until years have gone by. You can't release 5% of your space at a time. You know it doesn't work that way.
Actually if the iPad had and rentals and the DRM to enforce it wouldn't be so bad, because rental prices are cheaper than buying and there is ALWAYS a way around DRM schemes.
I wonder if one could scan a iPad screen like a paper book? OCR the results?
Just hold home and lock and take a screenshot. Pirating E-Books is going to probably be the easiest thing even on the iPad, and if the screenshot capabilities are removed, then I'm sure someone will make a jailbreak app that does it easier and faster. Sucks for anyone who's trying to make money,but you're right, theres always a way around DRM, and especially when it's something you just look at.
I wonder how many actually read the whole article before they commented?
I also wonder why some people here dis every article that AppleInsider publishes. Fortunately, I would like to ignore them. However, it is virtually impossible to do so, as long as somebody else responds to their trolling, the crap still shows up.
To answer my own question, I have a feeling that they don't, primarily because they can't.
If a well known author really wanted to make some money, they'd hire their own editor, PR team, typesetter, graphic designer, etc. and simply sell direct to the public via iTunes. I got the impression that an author like Dan Brown already has some kind of production team or cross-promotional sharing agreement, if you saw him on the Today Show promoting his last book it seemed like he was there all week.
What will keep the star authors from taking their books direct to iTunes? Nothing except for long term or exclusive contracts.
You lease warehouses for years at a time. Those leases can be twenty years long. And many companies in businesses like that own their own.
In these days of depreciating building markets, most landlords are not going to be that easy bout allowing companies out of long term leases made when times were looking up. At the very least, the penalty would be large. I know the business from the other end. My first company went from leasing space to buying our own building, and my second leased several floors.
Besides, this will be a deterioration of conditions that will take place over years. There may be no point in which a company will be able to let go of a specified amount of space until years have gone by. You can't release 5% of your space at a time. You know it doesn't work that way.
Still, there are other options such as sub-leasing. If you own your own warehose, you have the flexibility of selling the warehouse.
Sure, if you have only 10,000 sf of warehouse space, you won't be able to reduce your space by 500 sf But if you are a large publisher and have 1,000,000 sf of warehouse space, you can definately reduce your space by 50,000 sf.
Rent is ridiculously cheap anyways. It's the labor involved with distribution that is expensive. And that can be cut at a moment's notice.
Right.
http://screencrave.com/2009-04-14/bl...to-make-money/
I tink a lot of what sites like that write as mostly BS. While there's fraud in every business, and just think of how many times you got something you should have paid for, but didn't, the fact till remains that most movies lose money.
All you have to do is look at the top ten listings. You'll see some pretty big budget movies sinking the second week into irrelevancy. In fact, many big budget movies do that the first week. What happens then?
If a well known author really wanted to make some money, they'd hire their own editor, PR team, typesetter, graphic designer, etc. and simply sell direct to the public via iTunes. I got the impression that an author like Dan Brown already has some kind of production team or cross-promotional sharing agreement, if you saw him on the Today Show promoting his last book it seemed like he was there all week.
What will keep the star authors from taking their books direct to iTunes? Nothing except for long term or exclusive contracts.
Once the ipad/kindle become as ubiquitous as the ipod, I could see this happening. I could even see a low-cost small publisher merely providing the service of putting the book up on iTunes.
The report said that while the average hardcover bestseller is $26, the cost to print, store and ship the book is just $3.25. That cost also includes unsold copies returned to the publisher by booksellers.
Now there will be zero returned/unsold books.
"Out of that gross revenue, the publisher pays about 50 cents to convert the text to a digital file, typeset it in digital form and copy-edit it," the report said.
This is done one time, regardless of how many copies are sold.
Copy-edit will take the most time/effort though this cost should have been included before the "printing".
Not true. Amazon was selling books at a loss to get more sales of the Kindle, and to apparently in an attempt to, at sometime in the future, get publishers to accept less. Also, at least 80% of the books they were selling were free.
As Amazon has never given any information out about actual numbers of Kindles sold, or e-books sold, or the average price of e-books sold, the assumption has been that they are taking a big beating on it. They constantly refuse to answer any questions on the subject.
So no one can actually show any proof that Amazon is taking a loss, yet no one seems to question this?