Posts
On the heals of yesterday's series of questions about what you'd pay for books published in non-standard formats, comes this article from the May 17 edition of the New York Times. The article presents David Baldacci's argument that substantially lower prices for e-books aren't sustainable in the economics of current publishing.
The article says that publishers are caught between the demands of "authors who want to be paid high advances and consumers who believe they should pay less for a digital edition." But in many cases, publishers struggle to make back the large advances and wind up losing money, even on otherwise successful books. No one wants to miss the next Harry Potter.
But if consumers aren't willing to pay more of the e-books, is the e-book phenomenon going to die on the vine? Not likely. Someone will push the e-books into existence, and force changes to an economic system filled with skewed incentives.
The paradox of insular language
1 year ago
2 comments:
I like your blog.I'm waiting for your new posts.
IS $15 too much for an e-book? My answer is a resounding *yes*! Factor in the price to pay for the stupid reader, (and the endless supply of batteries to make the thing run, if you take it away from a ac outlet) and then how much have you shelled out? For something that can turn belly-up dead when its inner time bomb says it's time for the owner to buy a new one--like all things computer? Hm...Looking at it that way, I'd say paying even a penny would be too much for the p.o.s. But then, i consider $7 and up too much for paperback, as well--when I'm sure the author isn't get diddly of that for themselves. *eg*
Post a Comment