I’ve been so pleased with so many of your decisions at Sourcebooks, like releasing Georgette Hayer backlist with spiffy covers and such high quality bindings that I’ve received letters from people thanking me for letting them know about them. There’s that upcoming Kinsale, too, that makes me giddy to the point of twitching.
But today’s news about ebooks? Oh, no. It’s a big ol’ clusterfuck of head shaking forehead pounding with a side order of, “Oh, honey.”
Sourcebooks is issuing 75,000 copies of “Bran Hambric,” a sizable print run in this economy, and has arranged a substantial marketing campaign and book tour for Mr. Nation.
“It doesn’t make sense for a new book to be valued at $9.99,” said Dominique Raccah, CEO of Sourcebooks, which issues 250 to 300 new titles annually. “The argument is that the cheaper the book is, the more people will buy it. But hardcover books have an audience, and we shouldn’t cannibalize it.” An e-book for “Bran Hambric” will become available in the spring, she said.
Richard Curtis, Mr. Nation’s agent, concurs on holding back the e-book edition. “We don’t want to undercut the sales and royalty potential of the printed hardcover,” Mr. Curtis said.
While filing my teeth and chewing on digital media for my daily nutrition could make for some awesome seminar presentations, I have to say, COME ON NOW AND I MEAN IT.
As an ebook consumer, I already agree to take on significant limitations when I choose digital media. I can’t share or lend it. I can’t in most cases give a copy of the book (unless I feel like Waiting for Fictionwise) to someone I think might like it. In some cases, as with Kindle, I can’t even guarantee that I’ll be able to download and reread the book more than six times.
Yet I choose digital media because it works for me, and I liek it. So why am I being penalized because I don’t want to buy the hardcover, and should therefore wait six months or more for the digital copy.
LISTEN UP. If you read nothing else but the following paragraph, then please know I mean what I say here:
I WILL NOT BUY A HARDBACK BECAUSE YOU WANT ME TO, BECAUSE IT’S BETTER FOR YOUR REVENUE STREAM.
I WANT EBOOKS. I WANT DIGITAL BOOKS. I DO NOT WANT HARDBACKS.
YOU CANNOT MAKE ME BUY THEM. YOU ONLY COST YOURSELF THE REVENUE OF MY PURCHASE.
Didja get all that? Seriously, my jaw dropped so hard when I read this article, I’m going to get TMJ from the WSJ.
Robert Gottlieb, chairman of Trident Media Group LLC and Ms. Coulter’s literary agent, said he doesn’t allow any of his authors’ books to be published simultaneously as an e-book when he can prevent it.
“It’s no different than releasing a DVD on the same day that a new movie is released in the movie theaters,” he said. “Why would you do that?”
Mr. Gottlieb, I’ll be honest: I’m embarrassed for you.
Films on DVD and feature films in theatres are NOT the same as digital books and hardbacks. A more apt comparison would be DVD and VHS. VHS, by the way, would be the hardback.
I fully admit that the format questions and the price questions about digital books are still up in the air.
But making this decision is insulting to a growing segment of the fiction buying readership, and, to be frank, ignorantly based on faulty logic. You encourage two things by delaying digital releases of book titles: piracy and ire. I’m not going to pirate books, but I am going to remember that somehow, my digital purchase of your book is of lesser value than a hardback purchase, despite the fact that I buy more books and read more books than most people.
In all things, one should listen to Sarah, in this case, Sarah Rotman Epps of Forrester Research:
“Publishers are in denial about the economics of digital content,” said Forrester Research analyst Sarah Rotman Epps….
Although e-books account for only 1% to 2% of total book sales, as measured by dollars, they are one of publishing’s few bright areas. Ms. Epps… estimates that by year end there will be more than three million dedicated e-reader devices in the U.S., with two million sold in 2009.
Yes, 1-2% is not a great amount, but it’s the only one that’s growing at such an exponential rate. Look at the IPDF statistics for heaven’s sake. Are any of your other revenue streams flooding like that one? In this economy, I doubt it.
I probably should not take decisions like this one so personally, but I am holy hopping angry. It’s insulting to me that I should be dictated what format I should buy, and should be penalized for preferring a different format.
This decision was poorly made and poorly defended. I’m a big fan of your company, and I’m looking forward to seeing you all this week at RWA. You are one of the companies that seems to approach publishing, specifically romance, a little differently, offering up exceptional romance titles long out of print for new audiences to discover.
Digital books are also a new audience, one that should be fostered and treated as equal to those who read paper books. I wish you held us in the same respect as you do your other readers.
Let me be perfectly clear. I mother fucking hate piracy of books. I know having run this site for the last few years how very much of a difference it makes to authors who are trying to keep writing as their full-time job to lose even 20 or 50 sales to piracy. AT NO TIME do I advocate that people take free and pirate over paying.
I do think attitudes like the one exhibited by Sourcebooks encourage piracy and that is so unfortunate because ironically, I’m on the side of publishers and authors: I very much want them to make a profit. Why? Well, that part is all about me: I like reading books.
Specifically, I like reading ebooks, and I resent deeply being told that my purchase of a digital book is not what they want. Yes, in an ideal marketplace we’d all have beaucoup bucks and buy hardbacks.
My point is, the price of ebooks until now has been very fluid and inconsistent, and because it seems so arbitrary it’s insulting to the ebook consumer. Combined with a statement that my digital purchase is not preferred and will therefore be delayed because my purchase detracts from a preferred format, that fluidity and inconsistency makes me hopping mad.
Personally, I’m ok with buying a digital book at a higher price if it’s a brand spanking new book available in hardcover only. I don’t think there has to be one price for digital books and that the price can adjust depending on the hardcover then paperback release schedule.
I’m with you entirely that authors and publishers need to get paid – hell to the yes on that one – but the manner in which Ms. Raccah approached her explanation demeans and dismisses a growing and eager book buying readership. I agree: we need to be having a conversation about pricing, format and profit that involves the publishers, the authors, and the consumers.
That said: downloading a book for free means that that author may not be able to write as a full-time job and support herself or her family any longer. Really. If you like the books you’re reading, buy them. Otherwise we will all have less to read.
@ G:
I’m not sure if you’re aware of this, but epublishers (let’s say folks like EC, Loose ID, Samhain, etc) do not operate on an advance business model. Authors, instead, receive a much higher royalty on their sales. This is a very successful and highly profitable (for all involved) business model. So your supposition that the “dinisaur” apparatus of the advance model is absolutely required, is false.
Possibly, if NY publishing thought about re-vamping their payment models, the format issues might then resolve themselves.
Question for any authors here who publish through EC/Samhain, etc: Is your royalty on the ebook the same as the hardcopy (when there IS a hardcopy, that is)?
@Randi-Are you really mocking my spelling? I can make worse typoes than that!
Are you also suggesting that the e-pub (or self pub)model of getting more revenue with every unit sold with no upfront advance can actually allow people to write full-time who don’t already have a stable of novels giving them earnings? I was a stockbroker too- I know what it’s like to live by commission as well as have a trailing stream of income (not that I had it- I was never into ripping off friends and was a broker only for legal reasons).
Far more knowledgeable folk than I have discussed why S King thinks a better royalty split with no upfront makes sense, while the other 99%+ of authors who don’t make the top 10 lists would never be able to survive. Go check out the huge internet thread last year about royalties and advances. It ran through Peterfreund, Scalzi, and a host of other pros’ blogs.
This is assuming that writers would prefer not to have to write while working full-time. I like it when the authors I enjoy can actually live on their writings. Think of the time lag alone, to get 4 or 5 books out there to survive on royalties (one hopes). Ignoring publishing lead time (if you postulate instantaneous, which is a fallacy)- there’s the writing time. And what might take 6 months to a year could take 3-5 if wrapped around full time and perhaps grueling jobs.
What if, in a staged release from hardcover to paperback and ebook, you could get the ebook free with the purchase of the hardcover from Amazon or B&N upon relase of the hardcover? You get the ebook now, before it is officially available for $9.99 in six months. What if Barnes & Noble and Amazon launched a program with the Public Library Association to give consumers the option to donate the print edition to a struggling public library? Or you take it to give as a gift or re-sell on Amazon?
http://publishingassociates.blogspot.com/2009/07/thoughts-on-ebook-pricing-release.html
@ G: No, I wasn’t mocking you. I used your spelling b/c that’s what you used. I didn’t know if “dinisaur” was a shorthand for something or maybe you meant to spell it that way. Rather than assume you had misspelled it, I just chose to use your spelling. And I used quotes b/c you used quotes.
As regards your assumption that the higher royalty model does not allow authors to work full-time-well, I guess eauthors would be able to tell you whether they can or not. But your assumption that an advance model allows authors to work full time is fallacious. Only the NY best sellers make enough on advances to write full time. Mid list and new authors don’t make enough on their small advances to write full time. Unless they have other income coming into the household (like a spouse).
I’m confused about this: “Think of the time lag alone, to get 4 or 5 books out there to survive on royalties (one hopes). Ignoring publishing lead time (if you postulate instantaneous, which is a fallacy)- there’s the writing time. And what might take 6 months to a year could take 3-5 if wrapped around full time and perhaps grueling jobs. “
I’m not clear on what your suggesting here…
I think you are incorrect. I gather this from reading Carrie Vaughn’s blog, Diana Peterfreund’s blog, Sara Reese Brennan’s blog,John Scalzi’s blog and all the other authors who posted on this thread, from knowing Jim MacDonald and Deb Doyle, Jane Yolen and other authors.
It is possible to concentrate on writing after a book or two, with some luck, as a “regular” author.With advances. Was I unclear- it takes time to write a book. It takes much more time to write a book when one uses up 10-14 days earning a living in another way and perhaps also eating, sleeping, having a family. Advances allow one to eat while writing. Even small advances help. They get bigger if the first book does well, btw.
It takes say, a year to write the book. Get an agent, get a contract. At least another year until it’s pubbed. Probably 18-24 months with edits, etc. 6 more months until royalties.
Even if you take a lot of pubbing time out, it still takes time to write and edit the book. I say twice as long without any advance (which is generally 1/3 on signing, 1/3 hand-in, 1/3 pub- or so I have read).
Is this rocket science? Because I am not an engineer but it seems, at this place in the art of authoring and publishing, this is where we are. And I don’t like the huge advance. I think it throws too much marketing (as a result) at too small a number of books.
And poster above- I would definitely trade the HC for an e-book six months later (unless I love the art- and it’s not on the e-book. Maybe. Depending.) That would allow the e-book to be DRM and later.
No, we do not. I’m a reader. I’m in this to be entertained, not to support authors or make sure they get to eat beyond paying for the entertainment I consume.
I get really annoyed when people tell me I demand too much or I shouldn’t be expecting quality, preferred format or similar bs. I’m willing to pay for the words others write. I have no other responsibilities as a reader/consumer. None!
Publishers want me to buy their product and they are in competition with many other publishers and other forms of entertainment. They want my good will and my money, so they ought to make sure their offerings are competitive and attractive enough to make me want to spend my cash for their product and not for some other product.
If they make it hard for me to get their product, if they make me feel like I’m not their preferred customer, if they think they can play head games with me, I won’t buy. End of story.
@ G: I think we’re just going to disagree, here. Which is fine.
However, yes you were unclear, to me; and no, it isn’t rocket science-but since I was confused, it might as well have been. Geez, snarky much?
Sorry- I’m a bit tired. It’s late here and my two kids are a handful. I do sometimes get snarky. I’m also a little oversensitive to perceived snark myself, so happy thoughts to all, I’m sure we will be thinking over this subject for the next several years. My brother is a dedicated Kindle user himself.:)
Sarah: But even in your example of paying a premium for ebooks released at the same time as hardbacks you’re “encouraging” piracy because when people see ebooks costing more than $10 many resent the evil publishers who are overcharging them for products they can make for free (hyperbole intended). I don’t think the situation is clear-cut for publishers either.
And I’m don’t get why being told ebooks aren’t the preferred format is so insulting. At the very least, I can’t see that it’s any more insulting than saying mm isn’t the preferred format. Hardback has always been the preferred, most prestigious format. It’s going to take a while to change that mindset—among publishers as well as authors, critics and some readers.
If anyone’s interested, the NYT has a good overview of the issues: When to Schedule E-Book Releases – A New Worry for Publishers.
I agree with everyone else who has said readers buy preferred formats and the delaying of cheaper formats from being released b/c the publishers thinks this will somehow force people to buy the HCs is total stupidity.
I like paperbacks. I read paperbacks. A lot of them. Anywhere from 3 to 8 titles a week. Every week. Every week for over 20 years. That’s a lot of books. I detest going to the bookstore every week for a freaking YEAR only to see the titles I _want_ to read and _will_ buy are still in stinking, stupid, expensive, too-big HC.
Yes I am an aussie.. but you are nicer than me. 😉 The whole stoopid aussie publisher crap release schedule and no ebook thing, just makes me crankier and more impatient for someone to work it out.
Hell, yes!
You know what my approach to this situation is? It’s to buy a hard copy of the book USED (which, btw, you can get on the first day the book is released these days) and deprive the publisher of the revenue TOTALLY.
That’s right; these publishers who think they are cannibalizing their own print sales by putting out ebooks at the same time as print are actually, in my case at least, LOSING THE SALE COMPLETELY WHILE INDIRECTLY SELLING ME A PRINT BOOK. Oh, the irony, I can’t help but love it.
And as a secondary issue, this approach also deprives the author of a royalty, for which the author can thank his or her publisher. One more reason IMO authors need to be much more connected to the growth of digital, and not in a OMG MAKE IT STOP kind of way.
As a publisher, I understand Ms. Raccah’s dilemma, and—before you damn me—here’s why: the costs of making a hardcover book are similar to making a paperback and e book. Really, they are. (editorial, marketing, distribution costs—those don’t go away w/ digi books.) Printing accounts for roughly 10% of a book’s cost. The other 90% of the costs still exist whether it’s a p-book or an e-book.
Digi book readers probably aren’t the readers who buy hardcovers. (Would love to see some market research to know if this is true, BTW.) But—and this is an important factor in a decision like this—a large purchaser of hardcover editions are institutions and libraries. If a pub releases digi w/ hardcover and libs buy the cheaper digi edition instead of HC, then a pub looses significant revenue.
Given our modest profit margins on books to begin with, it’s tough to break from a model that brings reliable income, even as we desparately NEED to break from that model and forge a new path. We’re bumbling our way through finding a new biz model in the age of digi books.
Cost aside, they’re losing potential sales. The comparison to movies/dvd might not be the same but I’d bet the comparison to TV and TV on DVD is much closer. I’ve noticed shows on DVD are coming out MUCH sooner than before—I think Dollhouse comes out this month instead of making us wait a year. AND as I recall, it was the *ahem* online viewing stats that helped save Dollhouse—even TV is having to change the way they look at numbers and the way they meet the demands of the viewing public. Obviously those who watch TV online aren’t hurting the networks (much?).
Don’t get me wrong, I’m NOT anti-hardcover but there are very few authors I buy in hardcover (outside of YA!!). What Gotleib etc don’t realize is, consumers are going to do what they’re going to do! Those who want the HC version are going to buy it regardless if there is an ebook version or not! Funny enough Jackie Barbosa and I were discussing this and she HATES HC!! LOL There’s no undercutting, there’s only meeting the needs of ALL their consumers.
I have GOT to get dressed for work but wanted to comment on Meljean’s question. There actually IS a clause in my Kensy contract that if e is the only format available and if sales fall below a certain level, the book is considered officially out of print (I think it’s 100.00). So, to answer your question, for one pub, the answer is yes, there is a point where a book is considered out of print. Take that for whatever it’s worth 😀