I think this is a good idea and I support their decision. There’s nothing like reading a real book anyway. Can’t see myself curled up in bed with an e-book

James McQuivey suggests these publishers are being shortsighted, that the analog business model is on life support, while the digital model requires fresh thinking:

http://blogs.forrester.com/consumer_product_strategy/2009/12/urgent-note-to-book-industry-theres-a-better-way-to-window-ebooks.html

There is no easy fix, that’s for sure. I’m a novelist and vast consumer of print. Every available space in my home is shelved and booked. But I do like technology and have started to read in multiple platforms to maximize time: audiobooks on the road, or when my hands are occupied cooking, cleaning, gardening, walking; e-books when stranded with only my i-Phone, or in bed (no lights to keep hubby awake!).

I recently consumed one novel (necessary for research) in all 3 formats and have consumed others in at least two. McQuivey suggests bundling e-books with hardcovers. I’d pay for that. I’d pay more than $9.99 to have an e-book (and/or audio version) available on day of release, in some cases, too. Maximize our choices, don’t limit them.

One thing is for sure, the eBooks themselves don’t care what happens to them as they occupy no physical space and can be replicated an infinite number of times and delivered anywhere in the world almost instantaneously.

These facts do not located them ‘between the hardcover and the paperback’ but rather before, during and after those other formats. Around those formats and past the boundaries that traditionally limit the impact of a writers’ ideas on a global scale.

The raw facts of digital dissemination are not limited to decisions at Simon and Schuster, tho their authors and readers are certainly limited by those decisions.

I am interested to see what sort of results will come from this decision and what other ideas regarding timing are brought forward by other publishers as time goes on.

Looking forward to watching the official language of explanations develop as more decisions ‘to protect the future of publishing’ are made and also looking forward to celebrating the success of these decisions in the future.

This seems like a good compromise for the time being. An idea I had would be for book publishers to do what some independent music labels are doing with vinyl records and include a download key with their hardcovers. That way people don’t have to buy the book twice they want it on both formats.

The technological horse has left the barn and it’s not wearing a saddle sewn by the thimble suckers who populate the executive suites of the major publishing houses.

As a consumer, I’m thinking the cost to produce, store and distribute a paperback novel must be higher than what is involved with selling an ebook. It’s therefore difficult for me to understand and accept that an ebook should be priced higher than a paperback.

It would be interesting to know what the actual cost is to produce an average-sized novel (90,000 words) in each of the four formats – hardcover, trade paperback, paperback, ebook.

Companies don’t always price their products based on actual cost, but perceived value. It helps to make up for the shrinking margins existing in other product lines. However, in the case of ebooks, I think a fair number of consumers will expect an ebook to be priced on par or lower than a paperback format.

Is a retail price of $9.99 an unfair amount, based strictly on cost? It would be interesting to know.

I think this is a great idea! Now all the publishing companies have to do is find a way to lower the cost of hardcovers, and perhaps the e-book craze will fade. Even as much as I’m against e-books, I cringe a little at having to pay almost $30 for one new hardcover.
Is four formats really necessary? Someone mentioned how expensive it must be to produce four different formats of a book. Why not drop one? As long as we’re not dropping physical books in favor of e-books, I would be agreeable to that.

MobyLives has suggested that this is also part of a strategy that will see publishers being on board with Apple’s (rumored) new tablet as their e-reader of choice, largely because of a more reasonable profit sharing agreement than the ‘thugs’ (ML’s words, but a sentiment I can get behind) at Amazon would consider. (article: http://mhpbooks.com/mobylives/?p=11291)

That being said, while I don’t much care for e-books myself, I’m not against them. What does bother me is this notion that they’re somehow going to ‘replace’ the extremely robust technology of the printed book. At this point, e-book readers cost more than the annual spending of many casual readers before a single book is purchased, never mind how completely inaccessible they are to anyone on the wrong end of the digital divide. They are also made more or less exclusively from non-renewable materials (plastic is made from oil, metals must be mined, and zinc production–which is a part of many consumer electronics–is actually looking to drop by 50% in the next few years as most major sources become depleted), while books, despite the largish carbon footprint that comes from their transportation, are made forests that, despite some problems, we largely know how to manage sustainably.

E-books aren’t going away, and nor should they. But we need to be a bit more conservative in our claims about them, I think. The problem I see is if we wind up beating up traditional publishing with claim chowder and predatory pricing to the point where, when the e-book market finally establishes itself, there will nothing left for those of us who can’t afford all these lovely middle class trinkets, but who could have afforded a handful of actual physical books.

Vivian deWinter says, above: “As a consumer, I’m thinking the cost to produce, store and distribute a paperback novel must be higher than what is involved with selling an ebook. It’s therefore difficult for me to understand and accept that an ebook should be priced higher than a paperback. It would be interesting to know what the actual cost is to produce an average-sized novel (90,000 words) in each of the four formats – hardcover, trade paperback, paperback, ebook.” To that I would add “audio”.

Nonetheless, that “actual cost” must factor in development (editing, designing, promoting — and, oh yeah, paying the author). If those costs could be successfully spread across multiple platforms, then one might be able to arrive at an equitable “actual cost.”

Vivian deWinter says, above: “It would be interesting to know what the actual cost is to produce an average-sized novel (90,000 words) in each of the four formats – hardcover, trade paperback, paperback, ebook.” Paperbookwriter added, “To that I would add “audio”.”
Well, here goes with some ballparking to advance the discussion…
AFTER the editing and design/layout, a hardcover would cost (in quantities over 5,000) about $6 each to print; a quality paperback about $3.50, and a pulp paperback (in far larger quantity) about $2.00. AFTER $200 in re-formating work, an eBook costs less that $.01 per copy to “print” each copy. After $20,000 to $40,000 in studio work and ‘talent’ fees, an audio book costs about $2 each to press and jacket as a DVD or less than $.01 per copy if sold online as an MP3 download.

And remember, of course, eBooks aren’t sold on a consignment (returnable) basis, so the publisher isn’t stuck with paying printing, warehousing and freight for unsold copies.

@Bruce Batchelor – Please don’t forget the data costs of producing an eBook, including man-hours spent reformatting for correct output, usually an extra proof read, and the cost of Data Asset Management, which can get very pricey. As well the data tracking for multiple editions of the book, etc.

To be fair, all of these prices will go down, but right now companies are spending a lot of money restructuring and adjusting to digital change. It’s not cheap at all.

Hey Nick, Thanks for pointing that out. I agree you can pay a lot, OR… simply export the text from Quark or InDesign to Word, and do a quick scan for gitches. Figure on $150 to $200 per book maximum. Then upload the file to Smashwords who convert the doc file into half a dozen formats and distribute it just about everywhere (Kindle, Sony, B&N, Shortcovers, etc.). You get one cheque and a spreadsheet explaining sales through the various editions and channels. You get impressive royalty percentages, and aren’t locked into a Data Asset Management company. In a year or two, when this market settles, you can grab your books in the various formats (Mobi, ePub, Sony, etc.) from Smashwords and move on to a better solution.

Probably okay for text-heavy books, but not a great solution for anything more complicated than a short story collection. Poetry, illustrated texts, etc. are a big problem with conversions. If you have an electronic file of a novel, it’s a very easy convert, and can be done in-house.

And there is no way Smashwords would allow, say , House of Anansi to upload titles, let alone Hachette. Smashwords has, what, 5000 titles? Lots of pubs have that on back-list. Plus even getting that back-list in a digital format can be a drag (often having no electronic formats). And then Smashwords doesn’t allow DRM… (not that I have great things to say about DRM).

My point is more that a huge shift is occurring in the industry and replacing workflow, restructuring organizations, and managing mass-amounts of data is costly.

I believe the movie business originally took a similar route, deciding to release Cinema, then TV premiere, then -finally- DVD.

They got the order wrong. Watched any TV movie premieres lately?

Four months after the initial hardcover marketing spree is far too long, in my view. The industry should embrace and facilitate eBooks, not attempt to hold them back. Hardcover is not threatened by eBooks at all – the markets are different. Concurrent release is the way to go.

And don’t get me started on the foolishness of regional publishing restrictions! -LOL

Cheers,
-Phflupp