# Why Sell for ONLY $2.99?



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

So I've pretty new to Kindleboards, but I've been poking around the site a lot the last few days and trying to learn as much as I can about this newfangled ebook revolution from this site and all the blogs I can find. One thing that seems to crop up here (with good reason) is a discussion on price. The school of thought I'm most interested in is this idea that $2.99 is an acceptable price for an ebook. I very much disagree with this mindset. And I'm not a proponent of dropping prices to .99 cents, either. My question is this: Why aren't authors charging MORE? Why not charge $4.99, or $6.99, or *gasp*, even $9.99? Let's explore the arguments against this.

*Argument 1: $2.99 lets us make what traditionally published authors make, per book*
The first argument I heard for $2.99 was from J.A. Konrath's blog, where he astutely points out that with Amazon's 70% royalty rate, authors can make $2.08 per book at $2.99, and this compares very favorably to the earnings many traditionally published authors make on print books. That's all well and good, but why should authors be happy to earn only as much as they've always earned, when everyone seems to agree that the publishing industry is broken and unfairly takes advantage of authors? In the past, authors had to accept getting 8% from a $25 hardback because they didn't have a choice. They couldn't publish and distribute their own books to a mass audience. Now, that barrier has been lifted, and there's nothing stopping authors from making MORE than they made before. So why sell at only $2.99, and put yourself in a situation where you're doing only as well as a group of people (authors) who have been getting ripped off for years? It makes no sense.

Looked at from another point of view, publishing companies have always argued for keeping a bigger piece of the pie because they had to pay everyone else who worked on your book. Editing, marketing, cover design, etc. Well guess what? All those things are now being handled by self-published authors too, so is it so crazy to think authors deserve more than the $2 they were getting before for simply writing the book and handing it off for others to take the rest of the way? I don't think so.

*Argument 2: People won't pay more than $2.99 for an ebook*
This just flat out isn't true. Sure, there are plenty of people who just want to gobble up free books and cheap reads for 99 cents. But outside of the self-published world, if you believe all the reports (from Amazon's own mouth), there are an awful lot of people buying ebooks these days, and publishers are still getting away with charging $7.99, $9.99, or even $12.99 for their ebooks. So why shouldn't you? After all, as I pointed out above, you're performing all of the same functions as an entire publishing company.

Now, I'm not saying everyone should run off and jack up their book prices to $9.99. But what's wrong with $4.99? At the 70% royalty rate, that would be $3.50 per book. And yes, I know that it's more than traditionally pubbed authors make, but the customer doesn't know that. The average book-buyer doesn't see a $25 dollar hardcover and think that only $2 is going to the author - they have no idea. So it's not like customers are going to be furious that authors are making more on their work.

*Argument 3: Stephen King can afford to charge $9.99. I'm not Stephen King*
I've seen this one a lot already in my short time here. Granted, you're not Stephen King, and I'm not either. None of us have his name recognition, and likely never will. But so what? Say you walk into a bookstore, and you pick up a new Stephen King paperback and another paperback that's sitting next to it by some guy you've never heard of before. Maybe the King book costs $10. Do you expect the book from the guy you've never heard of before to cost $3? No, of course not. It also costs $10! By pricing them the same, publishers are telling us they are of equal quality. And as a customer, I'll read the back of both books and decide which I like better, which is a decision that's made regardless of price.

If you are putting books out on Kindle that you think are of "publishable" (whatever that means) quality, then you should charge for it. If your book is only half as good as most published books on the shelves of Barnes & Noble, then by all means, charge half as much. But just because the gatekeepers have suddenly been removed from the process doesn't mean you have to degrade the price (and perceived value) of your own work before it's even been judged by the market. If you are churning out books that are at least as good as those that can be found in bookstores, why not act like it?

Now, I'm not trying to tell any author here what to do. I'm a firm believer in both capitalism and artists having freedom over their work, so however you want to price _your_ book, that's up to _you_. It's what the market will bear, as they say. I'm just asking you to evaluate the current status quo and ask yourself whether things should be different. My hope is that this post will spark some lively discussion. I don't think I have all the answers by any means, but in my opinion, these questions need to be asked.


----------



## Carolyn Kephart (Feb 23, 2009)

My books were finding buyers at $6.99. I lowered prices for October, but they'll go up next month. 

CK


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

You've made some very interesting points on price. I will definitely consider them when I price my next book.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

I think a lot of it has to do with wanting a larger number of sales sooner, rather than taking a longer view... I've seen folks panic after going only a day or two without sales... or even just "slower than normal" sales. It's understandable, but cutting prices to spur immediate results has its downside, too.


----------



## Gordon Ryan (Aug 20, 2010)

Nick, the good news is that we are free to charge whatever we think our books can demand.  There is no limitation (within Amazon's 70 % royalty guidelines) so give it a try.  Most people have settled in on the 2.99 route with outside advice from Konrath, Kindle Nation Daily, and simple sales experience.  Of course we would all like to charge 6.99, but if we do, someone will certainly decide to slip in under the radar at 6.49, then the discounting will begin.  The 2.99 price is the Amazon floor to achieve the 70 % royalty.  Once below that, .99 seems to be the price of choice with about .35 royalty the result, hoping for volume to make up the difference.

But we cannot (or should not - antitrust) collaborate to "fix" our prices at a given rate.  There are many guidelines based upon length of the story, so make your pick.

Gordon Ryan


----------



## Chris Hallbeck (Sep 25, 2010)

NickFox said:


> *Argument 1: $2.99 lets us make what traditionally published authors make, per book*


You make the same as a traditionally published hardcover. The point is you keep making the "hardcover royalty" forever instead of dropping down to 70 cents a book when it goes paperback. The result being making more per year.

But you can charge whatever you want. Just because it's working for some doesn't mean it a rule we should all follow.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

I wonder if I charged more, I might actually get a sale?


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

NickFox said:


> Now, I'm not saying everyone should run off and jack up their book prices to $9.99. But what's wrong with $4.99? At the 70% royalty rate, that would be $3.50 per book.


Two reasons why I'm very, very hesitant to try $4.99.

1: I will lose sales going from $2.99 to $4.99. This is sort of common sense. What isn't known, though, is how MANY sales I might lose raising up the price. My income is doubled, yes, but only if I maintain the same amount of sales. But what if my sales go down by half? Suddenly money's same, audience is lower. Means my next book, even at the higher price, will have even fewer sales because I won't have built up as large an audience. There's also a visibility factor. I've said again and again, the biggest problem most indies face isn't price or cover or even writing a good book: it's letting people know you even exist.

More sales means more reviews, higher rankings, more lists, more recommendations...which then leads to more sales, which restarts the loop. The higher the price, the lower that initial sales number, which means starting this chain becomes far more difficult, if not impossible for people who do not have top notch cover/book/description/track record.

2: Pricing at $4.99 puts me in direct competition with all those traditionally published works. Why oh why would I voluntarily do that? If I have the ability to be competitive with them in any way, why would I forfeit that? At $2.99 I am a fantastic bargain. Great story, cheap price, and high likelihood of recommendation to others. At $4.99...nah. I'd lose a ton of readers that gave me a shot just to see if I'm at all worthwhile.

Will I possibly try out higher than 2.99? Yes. I will. A Dance of Cloak's sequel will be higher price, since it is not directly within my series, I can get away with have it not sell as well (since it won't chokehold any further books). Perhaps it'll pay off. Perhaps not. But for now, the reasons to try a price above $2.99 boil down to guesswork and greed. Frankly, if a higher price than 2.99 worked, Konrath would have already done it. He has a large enough audience and advertisement machine going that if he wanted to, he STILL would sell books even at $6.99. But if it isn't worth it for HIM, then someone with far less going for them is probably going to suffer.

David Dalglish


----------



## DavidRM (Sep 21, 2010)

Gordon Ryan said:


> Of course we would all like to charge 6.99, but if we do, someone will certainly decide to slip in under the radar at 6.49, then the discounting will begin.


This is called "racing to the bottom". It's a horrible long term business strategy, but one a lot of small businesses make. The end result is that a lot of small businesses fail every year because they can't see past competing on price.

-David


----------



## Sandra Edwards (May 10, 2010)

I think the price one sets on their book is up to the author. It really depends upon your goals. I personally am more concerned with building a readership than what royalties I'm getting per book. What others do is up to them. Not my concern to wonder why they're charging a particular price for their book because I don't see what it has to do with me. 

But that's just my opinion 

Sandy


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Half-Orc said:


> More sales means more reviews, higher rankings, more lists, more recommendations...which then leads to more sales, which restarts the loop. The higher the price, the lower that initial sales number, which means starting this chain becomes far more difficult, if not impossible for people who do not have top notch cover/book/description/track record.


Thanks for your reply. I hadn't considered the necessity of reviews, rankings, etc., so that's one area where having more readers is definitely more important.

I also see your point about a series, if an author's goal was to hook a reader in the hopes that they bought all the books in a series, having a lower initial price may also benefit there.

You did make me chuckle with your "why oh why would I want to compete with traditionally published authors" line. That's another way of looking at it, I guess.


----------



## Barbiedull (Jul 13, 2010)

Speaking just for myself as a reader...I _might_ pay $9.99 to $14.99 for an ebook
that I have been waiting to read (part of a series). But, I would be more
inclined to order the print copy if I have to pay that much.

As far as unknown authors, you can set your "selling price" at whatever you choose...
it's the "buying price" that is important. If it doesn't sell at $9.99, $6.99, or even
$4.99...are you going to make more by keeping the price high or lowering it a bit
to attract more sales?

When you put a Stephen King book beside an unknown author (and price them the same)
you will see a lot more Stephen King books sold simply because of his reputation. The other author
may be very good, but he has not earned that reputation _yet._

Once again, just my opinion as a reader!


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Sandra Edwards said:


> I personally am more concerned with building a readership than what royalties I'm getting per book.


Do you mind if I ask why? I know it seems like a dumb question, since obviously everyone wants to build a readership. But I've heard this statement quite a bit. Are you more focused on building a readership because you just want people reading what you're writing, or because your goal is to have 10,000 readers paying .99 cents instead of 1,000 readers paying $10?


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

I think it goes to word-of-mouth advertising, do you want 1000 people talking up your book, or 10,000?


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

My gut (as a reader) says that 2.99 is a good price for a short book which has no particular costs associated.  I don't think it's racing for the bottom.  (I DO think that lower prices would be.)  

The thing is that there are many many audiences for books - and publishing in the past has had to concentrate on marketing to the higher end, because of the cost of printing and transportation and distributor and retailer take.  But those high prices are supported by an after market.  They are like the tip of the iceberg.  The majority of readers of a given book will be reading a used, borrowed or library book.  (Note, most readers don't fall into just one category - they buy some new, some used and use the library too.)

When we move to ebooks, we have the chance to go after this market directly rather than indirectly.  This market isn't stingy.  They're not looking to cheat anybody. They just buy what they can afford - as much as they can afford.  They tend to have a specific budget, and will buy more books if the books are cheaper, fewer books if they are more expensive.

IMHO, real price resistance doesn't enter into it until you get prices close to new paper - 7.99.  (I myself simply can't afford much above 5 bucks, unless it is a gift or collectible.  At that point, I have to wait for the library.)

Of course, my current books are around 60k long.  For my longer books I will look at pricing at 3.99 or 4.99.  (And I don't rule out 3.99 for the short ones completely.)  I just know what I feel comfortable paying, and that it doesn't take high sales at that rate to make me a reasonable income.  Anything beyond those considerations, though, seems pure rhetoric to me. 

Camille


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

BTackitt said:


> I think it goes to word-of-mouth advertising, do you want 1000 people talking up your book, or 10,000?


Word of mouth is powerful, no doubt. In talking about this hypothetical 1,000 fans, it reminds me of a theory I'd read called "1,000 True Fans." The link to it is here, if you're interested. http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2008/03/1000_true_fans.php

The basic idea is that you don't need 10,000 fans to make a living. You only need 1,000 "true fans" - those that are dedicated enough to buy anything and everything you put out. It's an interesting idea, and I think it certainly applies here.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> The thing is that there are many many audiences for books - and publishing in the past has had to concentrate on marketing to the higher end, because of the cost of printing and transportation and distributor and retailer take. But those high prices are supported by an after market. They are like the tip of the iceberg. The majority of readers of a given book will be reading a used, borrowed or library book. (Note, most readers don't fall into just one category - they buy some new, some used and use the library too.)


I'm not following you on how high print book prices are supported by an aftermarket. High print book prices are circumvented by an aftermarket. When I buy a used book, the author or publisher doesn't see any of that sale - it's already been bought and paid for once. When I borrow a book, it's the same way. And when I rent a book from the library, it's free. Granted, the library had to pay the publisher for that copy, but that's just one copy spread out over an indefinite numbers of readers. Could you explain further?


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

NickFox said:


> I'm not following you on how high print book prices are supported by an aftermarket. High print book prices are circumvented by an aftermarket. When I buy a used book, the author or publisher doesn't see any of that sale - it's already been bought and paid for once. When I borrow a book, it's the same way. And when I rent a book from the library, it's free. Granted, the library had to pay the publisher for that copy, but that's just one copy spread out over an indefinite numbers of readers. Could you explain further?


You have to look at the history of book publishing to see it, perhaps.

Books have always been a premium object, and originally were always intended to be a multi-owner product (in early days, through inheritance). They were marketed and treated in a way similar to coinage and jewelry - something that can be traded for value.

You still see this openly in the business model for text books - the price is only tenable because of an aftermarket makes it possible for the first purchaser to afford it.

When mass marketing made more and more goods available to the public as a one-use, one-owner item, prices on MOST things came down to fit that model. Books never have. Paperbacks came close for a while, but then went back up. For the most part, the whole pricing model of the publishing industry is ONLY possible because of the aftermarket. If there weren't a used book market, that pricing model would collapse - books would literally become a luxury item for a much smaller audience.

With ebooks, there is no aftermarket, no way to share the high cost.... and we're already seeing signs of that collapse right now. However, it's not a disaster, because there is no NEED for those high prices in ebooks. (There is a need to adjust the whole business model to fit it - because the current model is based on exclusivity and high prices - but that's going fast.)

Camille


----------



## Consuelo Saah Baehr (Aug 27, 2010)

Philip Chen said:


> I wonder if I charged more, I might actually get a sale?


Phillip: I have to smile at your post because I feel I'm in the same situation. Days with no sales. (I think that's what you are saying)
Today I refreshed my ads on Craigslist, thinking that might help. I did have a spurt in sales one day - I think that was the day Nick Spalding but one of my books on his blog. But since then, very few. I will beBOTD in a couple of weeks. Let's see what goes down.


----------



## amanda_hocking (Apr 24, 2010)

Here's my thoughts on it entirely: I don't want to pay more than $2.99 for an ebook. As an author, I do completely understand the idea of paying for the work not the tangible paper, but as a consumer, I scoff every time I see a book priced higher than $5.99, and even then, I feel like it's too much.

I have a Kindle, and I have lots of books on it. I have exactly 3 books that cost me over $2.99 - Douglas Adams, Stephen King, and Kurt Vonnegut. _Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy_ was over $9 and it irked me a lot, but I really wanted to read it.

That's how I look at it. At this point, I feel like $2.99 is a good price for an ebook the same way I feel like $.99 is a good price for a song on iTunes, and I don't pay more than $10 for a paperback. These are things that feel fair to me. The $2.99 price isn't something I feel should be exclusive to be indies. I think that's what ALL ebooks should cost. Or at lest under $5.

Because that's how I feel as a reader, that's how I price as an author. I won't price anything I write anymore than I'd be willing to be for the same thing.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

My books run through a range of pricing.  I'm learning as I go, but I won't charge more than $4.99 for the simple reason that I don't like paying over 5 dollars per book.  Plus from a business standpoint, I can make a reasonable profit at $4.99, and importantly, still pay for artwork and editing.  This is all assuming the 70/30 commission stays around.  My target audience for my cozies is used book buyers and library users.  I worked at a library--I studied my audience.  My frugal *mother* is a great teacher of how much an audience will pay for a book.  For some of my books (low-priced entry) I'm specifically after the crowd who *never* buys new.  They want a bargain.  They want a good, fast read and they don't want to pay a lot.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> You still see this openly in the business model for text books - the price is only tenable because of an aftermarket makes it possible for the first purchaser to afford it.


I'm still not buying this. There's no "team" aspect in book buying like you suggest. People only buy textbooks because they have no choice. Sure, the first purchaser can resell the book and recoup some of their cost, but that doesn't change the fact that the only reason they bought the thing in the first place was because their professor said "You need these five books, and they're all $100 each." It's not a business model, it's a racket.



daringnovelist said:


> With ebooks, there is no aftermarket, no way to share the high cost.... and we're already seeing signs of that collapse right now. However, it's not a disaster, because there is no NEED for those high prices in ebooks. (There is a need to adjust the whole business model to fit it - because the current model is based on exclusivity and high prices - but that's going fast.)


What collapse? Do you mean indie authors undercutting one another to sell as many books as possible based solely on price instead of the other aspects of the book? I don't think that's a problem with the business model... that's a problem with the authors.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

amanda_hocking said:


> Here's my thoughts on it entirely: I don't want to pay more than $2.99 for an ebook. As an author, I do completely understand the idea of paying for the work not the tangible paper, but as a consumer, I scoff every time I see a book priced higher than $5.99, and even then, I feel like it's too much.
> 
> I have a Kindle, and I have lots of books on it. I have exactly 3 books that cost me over $2.99 - Douglas Adams, Stephen King, and Kurt Vonnegut. _Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy_ was over $9 and it irked me a lot, but I really wanted to read it.
> 
> ...


I find it really interesting that you, as an author, still think like a consumer when it comes to ebooks. But I think you are very emblematic of how people think. This new thing called an ebook came along, and you were told that 2.99 is what they were worth, and now that's what you feel entitled to pay. If the bar was set at 3.99, you'd probably think that was okay, too, because $3 isn't fundamentally different from $4 or $5.


----------



## Jnassise (Mar 22, 2010)

Amanda has a point - I don't want to price my books higher than I am willing to pay for them.  I will pay $2.99 for an ebook.  I'd even pay $3.99 or $4.99.  At anything over six bucks, I think I'd rather have a paperback in hand to stick on the shelves.  At that price I want something more tangible for my money than an a digital file.

I know what I'm really paying for is the story, the experience if you will, and I think writer should be paid well for all the hard work that goes into developing such a thing, but despite that I can't seem to get over the mental barrier that I should have something material to show for that price.  Maybe its because I've been buying paperbacks for years at the $6-8 dollar range and so that's what I associate with that price point.

I know I currently sell my own books at $2.99 because when they were priced at $4.99 I was selling less than five a month.  Now, at the $2.99 rate, I'm selling several hundred.  That, to me, tells me where I need to set my price.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

NickFox said:


> I find it really interesting that you, as an author, still think like a consumer when it comes to ebooks. But I think you are very emblematic of how people think. This new thing called an ebook came along, and you were told that 2.99 is what they were worth, and now that's what you feel entitled to pay. If the bar was set at 3.99, you'd probably think that was okay, too, because $3 isn't fundamentally different from $4 or $5.


Has nothing to do with entitled to pay. The vast bulk of ebooks for sale are $9.99, with some even higher. But when I'm looking at how I'll be consuming 4-5 books a month (and I have a feeling Amanda is far more a voracious reader than I) you're looking at paying 50-60 bucks a month...or buying titles that are 2.99 and spending only 15. For very heavy readers, what do you think we'd prefer? What do you think we'd be comfortable with? Most readers have a set amount they feel comfortable paying over a month on books. If ebook prices were higher, then it's less that I'd start being more comfortable with higher prices. I'd just freaking buy less books.

Forgive me for thinking readers reading more is good. $2.99 is not some horrendous basement where we'll make no money.

And sorry, but don't tell me $3 fundamentally isn't any different than $4 or $5. Why do you think everything is listed as $2.99 instead of $3.00? It's just a penny, right? Shouldn't everyone be saying $3.00? But we're not, because $2.99 feels cheaper than $3.00, and even that tiny difference matters to a lot of shoppers.

David Dalglish


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

NickFox said:


> I find it really interesting that you, as an author, still think like a consumer when it comes to ebooks. But I think you are very emblematic of how people think. This new thing called an ebook came along, and you were told that 2.99 is what they were worth, and now that's what you feel entitled to pay. If the bar was set at 3.99, you'd probably think that was okay, too, because $3 isn't fundamentally different from $4 or $5.


Actually a few authors chimed in long ago about pricing experiments they ran. (Konrath being the forerunner here.) Amazon picked 2.99 to 9.99 for a reason; they didn't just pick that range out of the blue. There were a lot of threads on it at the time discussing the fact that Amazon probably had solid sales numbers to prove that a best seller at 9.99 outsold best sellers at 24.99. Or 14.99. Amazon didn't pick the range out of the kindness of an imaginary heart; they based it on a belief that most books could comfortably sell in that range and they could be profitable.

Now as to how indies choose a price, there are many methods to the madness. Many of us have experimented. Our results may differ just as much as our genres do. But like Amanda, I am a consumer first. I know my own buying patterns, and I pay attention to reader comments here and other forums. I know my mother's habits. I asked people at the library for over a year. Not every audience is the same as my audience.

I don't think we all believe $2.99 is the magic price because someone told us. It has worked for some of us. When it hasn't, we've changed our prices to see what happens. We're still learning and still working with various prices. $2.99 is often a place to start. So is 99 cents.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

NickFox said:


> I'm still not buying this. There's no "team" aspect in book buying like you suggest. People only buy textbooks because they have no choice. Sure, the first purchaser can resell the book and recoup some of their cost, but that doesn't change the fact that the only reason they bought the thing in the first place was because their professor said "You need these five books, and they're all $100 each." It's not a business model, it's a racket.
> 
> What collapse? Do you mean indie authors undercutting one another to sell as many books as possible based solely on price instead of the other aspects of the book? I don't think that's a problem with the business model... that's a problem with the authors.


Look, most people can only afford high books prices because they can trade or resell them. That's simply how it is. If it weren't for the after market, they wouldn't be able to afford them at all.

You think a "race to the bottom" is indies cutting their own throat, and I might agree with you on those who are going down to 99 cents for a novel. But it's really just another term for pricing collapse. Say what you will, but it isn't just indies. This is finally happening with traditional publishers too. It's never going to happen to the bestsellers (not at least until after the chaos settles down). But look at the back lists. I finally had a chance to buy a bunch of Georgette Heyer's classic mysteries just this past month or so. More and more books in current release are hitting more reasonable price points all the time.

If you stop looking at the indie books and the blockbusters (which are both outliers) and look at the general run, you'll see prices falling all over the place. If you spend much time with reader groups online or offline, you'll hear it again and again - "I can't afford it yet, I guess I'll go hunt for it used" (or go to the library or wait until Cousin Elmo buys it....) But in the past month or two, I'm not hearing that as much - what I'm hearing instead is "now that the price has come down, I LOVE ebooks!"

Even though we indies would like to believe we have an influence on all this, I don't think we do. This is a market-driven move.

The thing to remember is that we are not chasing the same audience who gladly paid 9.99 for a book - we're chasing a different audience who has never spent that much on a book in their lives. Those expectations are not being set by a bunch of indies they've never heard of. _This is an additional audience._ And they came pre-loaded with their price expectations. A lower price means the pie just got bigger. A LOT bigger.

I'm not saying you have to go after that audience, but given that this lower price (2.99 - 4.99) is definitely profitable, there's no way I'm going to exclude them (especially since I'm one of them).

Camille


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

NickFox said:


> I find it really interesting that you, as an author, still think like a consumer when it comes to ebooks.


Actually that's why publishing is such a backwards industry - retailers have to think like a consumer. That's what you do as a marketer and business person - and what you must do to succeed.

Publishers have been notorious for never doing any market research and having no idea of the real demographics of their customers. They leave it to retailers to do that research. And up until now, that's been okay, because to traditional publishing, the brick and mortar retailers ARE the customers. But brick and mortar retailers have their own constraints - in particular the need to turn over product. They prefer "push" marketing because it is a sucker's game to try to provide the customer with what he or she really wants in a physical product world. You can destroy yourself that way.

On the other hand, Amazon, and all online retail, is much more "long-tail" oriented, for that customer, the manufacturers need to understand and appeal to their audience. Amazon (unlike brick and mortar) doesn't need a best-seller to make money. They don't care if they sell a million copies of one book or one copy of a million books.

The publishers need to get savvy about marketing real fast. (And that includes indies - but indies have a lot less to lose, so it's easier to survive mistakes.)

Camille


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Personally, I don't get this mentality that looks the amount you make per copy of a book as the amount your getting per book.  By that, I mean a book is a single product.  How much you make on a book is not how much you charge for the book - it's how many copies sold at x sales price.  All this yapping about "My book is worth BLAH amount" is just strange to me.

If author A charges $2.99 for their book and sells 1,000 books and
Author B charges $9.99 and sells 250 books...

Which author has made more money for their work?


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Half-Orc said:


> And sorry, but don't tell me $3 fundamentally isn't any different than $4 or $5. Why do you think everything is listed as $2.99 instead of $3.00? It's just a penny, right? Shouldn't everyone be saying $3.00? But we're not, because $2.99 feels cheaper than $3.00, and even that tiny difference matters to a lot of shoppers.
> 
> David Dalglish


But it isn't.  You're talking about a marketing trick that we all fall for constantly. I'm talking about the fact that spending $3 vs $4 on a product isn't going to break the bank, and if it is, you probably shouldn't be buying the $3 item in the first place. Even to someone who buys 4-5 books a month as you suggest, that's only another $60 bucks a year. It's the same thing as spending $1 vs. $1.25 on your daily coffee. It's not noticeable.


----------



## G. Henkel (Jan 12, 2010)

I've been complaining about "indie" pricing strategies for along time. There is so much wrong with it, it's impossible to even get started - though your points probably hit the key points bullseye. I had a long post written here but I just hit the delete key because these arguments usually don't go anywhere. Too many indie authors do not understand even the most basic economic dynamics - mostly because they do it for fun - as amateurs - and not as a business. 

All I am saying at this point is that people pay $3.50 for a greeting card these days! A GREETING CARD!!!


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> Even though we indies would like to believe we have an influence on all this, I don't think we do. This is a market-driven move.
> 
> The thing to remember is that we are not chasing the same audience who gladly paid 9.99 for a book - we're chasing a different audience who has never spent that much on a book in their lives. Those expectations are not being set by a bunch of indies they've never heard of. This is an additional audience. And they came pre-loaded with their price expectations. A lower price means the pie just got bigger. A LOT bigger.
> 
> I'm not saying you have to go after that audience, but given that this lower price (2.99 - 4.99) is definitely profitable, there's no way I'm going to exclude them (especially since I'm one of them).


We'll have to agree to disagree on the book resale thing, so I'll let it go in an effort to stay on topic. I'm more interested in what you quoted above, because I think you bring up an interesting distinction between segments of the book-reading audience. Are others out there thinking like this when they write - targeting the audience that's willing to pay 2.99 or thereabouts for a book. I know at least one other person earlier mentioned this. How common is that out there?


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

I read 300 books in the last year. IF all had been priced at even $2.99 that's basically $900. I would say in honesty, about 1/3 were FREE. 1/3 were $0.99, and 1/3 were $2.99-$4.99. there *MIGHT* have been 3 or 4 total that were more than $5. And that's the max I prefer to pay.

It' is totally up to the author to choose the price they set their books at, but I know that except for a few "big name" authors, (and this number is shrinking ALOT) I will not pay what I see as exhorbitant pricing for their books. One of the MAJOR reasons I bought a Kindle is I believe $7.99+ is outrageous for a paperback, so I am certainly not going to pay that for an e-book.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Guido Henkel said:


> I've been complaining about "indie" pricing strategies for along time. There is so much wrong with it, it's impossible to even get started - though your points probably hit the key points bullseye. I had a long post written here but I just hit the delete key because these arguments usually don't go anywhere. Too many indie authors do not understand even the most basic economic dynamics - mostly because they do it for fun - as amateurs - and not as a business.
> 
> All I am saying at this point is that people pay $3.50 for a greeting card these days! A GREETING CARD!!!


Haha, that's a good point about the greeting card. I considered not posting this either, but then I looked at how long my post (read: rant) had gotten, and I didn't want to waste all that time. But I'm really glad I did, just because of the discussion that's been going so far. I hope it continues!


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

Guido Henkel said:


> All I am saying at this point is that people pay $3.50 for a greeting card these days! A GREETING CARD!!!


No, not all of us do. I prefer to send handwritten letters in place of greeting cards. I won't even pay $3.50 for a box of Christmas cards.


----------



## Carolyn Kephart (Feb 23, 2009)

> All I am saying at this point is that people pay $3.50 for a greeting card these days! A GREETING CARD!!!


Exactly.

CK


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

BTackitt said:


> No, not all of us do. I prefer to send handwritten letters in place of greeting cards. I won't even pay $3.50 for a box of Christmas cards.


Exactly. There is an entire population of us who stopped sending greeting cards (for me when they got to about 2 bucks, I got very particular, and then when they hit 3, I completely stopped). I was buying less and less books. I not only got a library card, I started working at a library. I hadn't owned a library card since I was a kid, but the prices of USED books were getting to be ridiculous. I had stopped going to half-priced books because half price for a hardback was not something I would buy.

And when paperback books hit 6.99, I was looking for alternatives--that library thing. Used off of Amazon. When they hit 7.99...and Amazon upped the shipping rate for used books...I became a reviewer. I then got free books.

So ebooks basically brought back pricing I was already shopping in. I'm not trying to tell anyone how to price their books. Go for it. But I do not believe we are "undercutting" anything. We're simply filling a spot that existed in the used market, the paperback bookswaps, the library market and so on.

There is more than one price point that works. We all have to find the target we're comfortable with and go after it.


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

Guido Henkel said:


> I've been complaining about "indie" pricing strategies for along time. There is so much wrong with it, it's impossible to even get started - though your points probably hit the key points bullseye. I had a long post written here but I just hit the delete key because these arguments usually don't go anywhere. Too many indie authors do not understand even the most basic economic dynamics - mostly because they do it for fun - as amateurs - and not as a business.
> 
> All I am saying at this point is that people pay $3.50 for a greeting card these days! A GREETING CARD!!!


I don't and I don't know anyone who does. I go to the $ store and get my greeting cards 2/$1. Obviously some people do because they wouldn't be in the stores at that price if they weren't selling.

Some people think it has to be Hallmark or American Greetings to have any value. That's name recognition and that's what we as indies are striving to reach.

As we become more established, we can raise our prices, but for now, price is our best marketing strategy.

You're right. We're not business people for the most part. Most of us are wage slaves (or former wage slave in my own case) and never had the opportunity to learn how to set up a business model. I've been in business for myself, and successfully, too, but what I did could in no way translate to the business of selling books.

I guess I just have a WalMart mentality.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

NickFox said:


> We'll have to agree to disagree on the book resale thing, so I'll let it go in an effort to stay on topic. I'm more interested in what you quoted above, because I think you bring up an interesting distinction between segments of the book-reading audience. Are others out there thinking like this when they write - targeting the audience that's willing to pay 2.99 or thereabouts for a book. I know at least one other person earlier mentioned this. How common is that out there?


That depends on what you mean by "targeting"?

I don't write to target an audience. I identify the audience I think is right for my book and I target that for marketing. I should also be clear that I don't think pricing is as important as others here do. I'm merely explaining why I think it's a fair price and a smart price. I disagree with those who think it isn't. I don't, however, think there are other prices that are wrong. I may hate push marketing, but I do understand that it is the only way to make a brick and mortar store profitable.

I do think price is a part of the package, though, and I think it's smart to be aware of how your audience perceives all aspects of the presentation of your book - from price to cover to genre to blurb to the writing itself. Nobody's generic advice should override your feel for your audience. (But if you aren't sure about your audience, or if you have gotten so much advice that you can't tell your own thoughts from the "common wisdom" any more, these conversations can be very useful in helping to think outside the box.)

You have to also understand that one of the main reasons I started Indie publishing is because I LOOOOOOVE the business end of publishing, especially the marketing part. (This may come as a surprise to people who have debated me on my idea that promotion is much less important than writing - but that's because I think writing more books is the single most important marketing move you can make. It's a marketing fetish of mine, not a writing thing.) I don't actually have a problem with traditional publishing - other than that it's slow and my genre tends to get the short end of the stick.

I worship the ground Seth Godin walks on (I don't always agree with him, but I do have a Seth Godin action figure on my wishlist for Christmas). I think every writer here should work to get their head around the new wave of marketing. (And if you want to read his books, I particularly recommend The Purple Cow, and Small Is The New Big, and The Dip. Or you can just read his blog. Most of the material in his books came from his blog, and in this rapidly changing world, you may find he has updated or changed his mind on things anywa. http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/ )

Camille


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

BTW, there is another reason why 2.99 is the standard rather than $3.00:

If you want to be in the Apple store, you have to have a price that ends in .99.

Camille


----------



## G. Henkel (Jan 12, 2010)

The .99 pricing is much older than the Apple store. It has all to do with human psychology.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Guido Henkel said:


> The .99 pricing is much older than the Apple store. It has all to do with human psychology.


Yes, that's the reason Apple chose to require it. But, it's not universal in the real world or the rest of publishing (as with Kobo and their 2.39 specials).

I was just pointing out that the reason it is used even more extensively in indie publishing than the rest of the world is because it's mandatory. We don't get to choose, unless we want to forego the Apple store.

Camille


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Allow me to channel my nner economist. i love this stuff.
    In a market where there were barriers to entry, publishers could enforce pricing. Since a limited number of novels were distributed, hardbacks could all sell for X, and paperbacks for Y. Stephen King and a first novel both sold for X.
    In a market without author barriers to entry, and few barriers to setting up an electronic retail operation, we have a situation with unlimited supply, and relatively fixed demand. (The number of readers and their book consumption is pretty level.)
    It's classical economics. Supply increases, demand is constant, and price falls. The gatekeepers are gone, and the undisciplined market prevails.
    Micro economics says the price will fall to the average cost of production. I have to think a bit more about it, but at first glance it appears the fishery example is closest to electronic books. In the unrrestrained fishery, nobody really makes any money. But unlike the fishery, with books there is no rationale for government imposing production limits.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

Guido Henkel said:


> All I am saying at this point is that people pay $3.50 for a greeting card these days! A GREETING CARD!!!


And I pay $0.99 for a Redbox movie that cost tens of millions to film. What's your point? I can also get a double cheeseburger at Burger King for a dollar or go to a restaurant and pay $7 for a cheeseburger, and also tip. If Burger King tried to charge me $7 it would be no sale.

The reason why indie books are priced at $2.99 is simple economics. It gives them a pricing advantage and once they've created their book, their costs to produce additional copies are zero.

If you want to charge more, increase demand for your books. Become a brand. Make people want your next book. Be warned that if you do raise your prices, you will likely decrease demand.

My feeling is that indie writers sell because there are a lot of e-reader owners out there looking for bargains. If indies priced their books at the same price as the traditionally published books I doubt they'd do well at all.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Guido Henkel said:


> All I am saying at this point is that people pay $3.50 for a greeting card these days! A GREETING CARD!!!


You should change that to some people pay $3.50 for a greeting card. I don't know anyone who pays that much when they can buy a box for little over $1 especially if they send out a lot of them. The only time I've ever spent money on a greeting card was for a special occasion like a wedding. After that mistake, I rolled the money I would have spent on a card which gets thrown out into the actual gift. I remember one time, a friend thought about buying a real fancy card for almost $10 dollars. I slapped him in the back of the head NCIS style and told him to buy a B&N or Amazon gift card instead.

A while back there was a poll that asked how much people were willing to spend for an eBook. Guess where that price range fell. I'll give you a hint, it's the price range Amazon chose for their 70% royalty plan. It wasn't picked arbitrarily. It was picked based on market research, focus groups, polling and following posts on forums.

We each have a way of determining what to charge for our books. When I settled on a price for my own books, I took into account my own spending habits, how my books sold at various prices and good ole research. There are very few authors where I would be willing to pay more than $5.99 for. If I'm not willing to pay that much, then why would I ask anyone else to? Yes, I know other people will have different spending habits but I'm not comfortable with the idea of charging someone more than I am willing to pay for the same product. I then took into account how much I would be willing to spend on an author I had never heard of. Finally, I experimented with different prices. After much trial and a lot of error, I found the $2.99 price works best for me right now. That might change later on when I have more books on Kindle, it might not. The key is to be flexible unlike traditional publishers.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Mark Asher said:


> And I pay $0.99 for a Redbox movie that cost tens of millions to film. What's your point? I can also get a double cheeseburger at Burger King for a dollar or go to a restaurant and pay $7 for a cheeseburger, and also tip. If Burger King tried to charge me $7 it would be no sale.


These aren't really fair examples. You're not buying a Redbox movie, you're renting it for one night.

And the reason you go to BK is because it's cheap, but it's of inferior quality. If the indie author is selling an inferior book (a BK cheeseburger) then they deserve to make less than the professional author (your restaurant).

My point is that if quality is equal, there's no point price cannot be equal (or at least much closer to equal).


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Micro economics says the price will fall to the average cost of production. I have to think a bit more about it, but at first glance it appears the fishery example is closest to electronic books. In the unrrestrained fishery, nobody really makes any money. But unlike the fishery, with books there is no rationale for government imposing production limits.


If you're right about this, then we're all in trouble, because the average cost of production on an ebook is pretty close to $0.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

NickFox said:


> My point is that if quality is equal, there's no point price cannot be equal (or at least much closer to equal).


But they're not out there in a vacuum. I'm much more likely as a consumer to pay $7.99 for a Nick Hornby than I am for a Nick Fox. At first, at least.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Monique said:


> But they're not out there in a vacuum. I'm much more likely as a consumer to pay $7.99 for a Nick Hornby than I am for a Nick Fox. At first, at least.


And I totally get that, as someone who is skeptical of people I've never heard of before, either. But if I believe my work is as good as Nick Hornby's (hypothetically, of course), then it's my job as a marketer to convince you to give my book a chance. As others in this thread have pointed out, it's about targeting readers - the right readers for your work. I'd just rather compete on "hey, listen to why you'll love this book" instead of "hey, this book will save you $5 bucks, and you might even like it."


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"If you're right about this, then we're all in trouble, because the average cost of production on an ebook is pretty close to $0."_
Trouble may very well be on the horizon. Cash costs may be zero, but labor costs are considerable. Each author will cost his or her own labor differently, and they will discount it for the personal benefit and satisfaction they derived from the endeavor. But experience shows us these implied costs will tend to cluster for those who choose to produce.
I suspect the chaotic situation will generate a new class of gatekeepers as online reviewers get stronger followings. Lots of ways that could go, but the most powerful example today is probably those emails I get from Amazon suggesting a book I might like, and they are usually right. That's a personally directed review.

Regarding greeting cards. We do pay $3.50 for a Hallmark at Walgreens, but we can send an animated electronic greeting cards for free.

OK. That's enough. I get carried away with econ. I'll shut up before someone shoots me.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Yes, but in many ways, your most powerful marketing tools are readers. Bring them into the fold, get them to advocate for you. That's, imho, the key to marketing. If as a marketer I can convince other people to become mini-marketers on my behalf, I've done my job. At least that's the idea. Lure more readers into your advocate army by offering the item a low(ish) price and as you build your brand. Once you have some traction, you can compete with Hornby on firmer footing.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> I suspect the chaotic situation will generate a new class of gatekeepers as online reviewers get stronger followings.


I can definitely see this happening too. As more and more books are available in the marketplace, consumers will have to know how to separate what they want to read from what they want to ignore.

And by all means, please keep talking economics as much as you want, at least in this thread!


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

NickFox said:


> But it isn't.  You're talking about a marketing trick that we all fall for constantly. I'm talking about the fact that spending $3 vs $4 on a product isn't going to break the bank, and if it is, you probably shouldn't be buying the $3 item in the first place. Even to someone who buys 4-5 books a month as you suggest, that's only another $60 bucks a year. It's the same thing as spending $1 vs. $1.25 on your daily coffee. It's not noticeable.


Do you have a household budget? Comments like that make me think you don't. The first thing you do if you need to "tighten the belt" is start whittling away at places you spend money. It's the same principle as going to Wal-Mart for one thing, and then you keep seeing these great deals - and by the time you hit the register you've got $100.00 of merchandise in your cart. Only it's in reverse. It's not the $3.00 or the extra $.99 that's going to break the budget, it's the cumulative total.

Anyway, Camille and David are correct, at least for me. Books costing more doesn't mean I'll spend more on books. It just means I'll buy less books. Not a good thing for authors as a whole, IMO.



Guido Henkel said:


> I've been complaining about "indie" pricing strategies for along time. There is so much wrong with it, it's impossible to even get started - though your points probably hit the key points bullseye. I had a long post written here but I just hit the delete key because these arguments usually don't go anywhere. Too many indie authors do not understand even the most basic economic dynamics - mostly because they do it for fun - as amateurs - and not as a business.
> 
> All I am saying at this point is that people pay $3.50 for a greeting card these days! A GREETING CARD!!!


Avid readers don't just buy one or five books a year (well, that might change if book prices keep trending upwards). Comparing a book to a greeting card isn't even apples to oranges. It's an orange vs. a side of fries.

ETA: I just got to thinking about the last time I bought a greeting card. Let's just say I can't even remember - it's been years. I see I'm not the only one.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Arkali said:


> Do you have a household budget? Comments like that make me think you don't. The first thing you do if you need to "tighten the belt" is start whittling away at places you spend money. It's the same principle as going to Wal-Mart for one thing, and then you keep seeing these great deals - and by the time you hit the register you've got $100.00 of merchandise in your cart. Only it's in reverse. It's not the $3.00 or the extra $.99 that's going to break the budget, it's the cumulative total.
> 
> Anyway, Camille and David are correct, at least for me. Books costing more doesn't mean I'll spend more on books. It just means I'll buy less books. Not a good thing for authors as a whole, IMO.
> 
> Avid readers don't just buy one or five books a year (well, that might change if book prices keep trending upwards). Comparing a book to a greeting card isn't even apples to oranges. It's an orange vs. a side of fries.


I don't really feel like responding to your assumptions about my household budget. Unless you want to come do my taxes, let's just say you're incorrect and leave it at that.

The comparison between a greeting card and a novel is not how many I buy per year, it's the amount of work that goes into producing it. I think that's what the earlier poster was getting at.

It seems there are a lot of voracious readers out there who own Kindles and demand cheap books so they can satisfy the constant urge to read. I'm not like that. I don't buy 5 books per year, but I'm not buying 50 either. So I don't mind spending a little more per book if it means I know I'm going to enjoy it. But if I read 100 books per year like some people here clearly do, I might have a different outlook.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"If you're right about this, then we're all in trouble, because the average cost of production on an ebook is pretty close to $0."_
> Trouble may very well be on the horizon. Cash costs may be zero, but labor costs are considerable. Each author will cost his or her own labor differently, and they will discount it for the personal benefit and satisfaction they derived from the endeavor. But experience shows us these implied costs will tend to cluster for those who choose to produce.
> I suspect the chaotic situation will generate a new class of gatekeepers as online reviewers get stronger followings. Lots of ways that could go, but the most powerful example today is probably those emails I get from Amazon suggesting a book I might like, and they are usually right. That's a personally directed review.
> 
> ...


Econ is cool. Nothing against econ, but it's a complicated thing.

The reason I don't think your fish example is right is for two related reasons:

1.) A fish is a fish for the most part. While people are enamored of a particular kind of fish, you don't see many end customers searching through the tuna cans at the supermarket for the fish caught by their favorite fisherman.

2.) We are already in a situation where people can get lots of free fiction - we've been in that situation for a very long time (have you heard the cool new thing called a "library"? Not to mention the Gutenberg Project and self-publishing on the web, and giveaway bags at the end of used book sales). People are still buying books, sometimes at very high prices. I believe this second point proves the first one.

Given that people can and do already buy books at all the price points we're talking about - from free to cheap to uber-expensive - I don't think that the business model of traditional publishing is such a major force on price. It's a part of a much bigger picture. And frankly I don't think prices were so high because they could force the market to accept them. I think they were so high because the cost of doing business for all concerned IS the barrier to entry in the market. If you want to make a living in traditional publishing, you have to price books high.

And that is the ultimate limit on how low the prices of ebooks can go: The cost of doing business is the time and energy necessary to put out a book people want to read. There has to be enough return to keep people working at it. That may not be much, but it has to be enough. When you combine that with the "scarcity" factor of people wanting YOUR book, that provides pushback against the lowest prices.

Camille


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> It seems there are a lot of voracious readers out there who own Kindles and demand cheap books so they can satisfy the constant urge to read. I'm not like that. I don't buy 5 books per year, but I'm not buying 50 either. So I don't mind spending a little more per book if it means I know I'm going to enjoy it. But if I read 100 books per year like some people here clearly do, I might have a different outlook.


I read a book every other day. Pre-Kindle, I bought some books new, borrowed some, was given some (used) and re-read my favorites. My book budget is fairly fixed. But that's a potential of 180-ish books a year. How many of them will be purchased new vs. rereads vs. loans depends on price.

I'll reiterate a post a made earlier:

How much you make on a book is not how much you charge for the book - it's how many copies sold at x sales price.

If author A charges $2.99 for their book and sells 1,000 books and
Author B charges $9.99 and sells 250 books...

Which author has made more money for their work?


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Arkali said:


> How much you make on a book is not how much you charge for the book - it's how many copies sold at x sales price.
> 
> If author A charges $2.99 for their book and sells 1,000 books and
> Author B charges $9.99 and sells 250 books...
> ...


In your example, it's Author A, but you kind of cooked the books there since you got to make up the numbers. 

I think a more apt question might be "Which author would you rather be, the one who has a small, dedicated fanbase who is willing to pay more for his/her work OR the one who has a larger overall readership, but whose fans are mostly casual and tend to come and go?"

Just to reiterate, I don't think I'm right and you're wrong. I'm still new to this whole discussion, and hopefully it's helping others as much as it's helping me.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> I don't really feel like responding to your assumptions about my household budget. Unless you want to come do my taxes, let's just say you're incorrect and leave it at that.


But you're making assumptions about the budgets of people who can't afford expensive books. Being one of them, I resent this.

I think you're getting a little mixed up about the importance of that budget too. You say you aren't someone who needs to buy 50 books a year. Well, okay, good for you, I guess.

But honestly, if ten people buy 50 books a year, and ten people by 5 books a year - who is more important in the overall economy of books? Especially given that those who buy more books per year probably spend more overall on books. But even if they didn't, even if we take cost out of the equation - who is more likely to mainly read a few best sellers, and who is morel likely to sample widely from the midlist and backlist?

Putting yourself in the readers shoes is a good learning tool. And yes, if you write books that only people exactly like you would ever read, and you know there aren't many of them but they would spend a lot of money on them, then sure, chase that higher paying audience. But don't limit yourself to what you would do - it's a great way to miss out on success.

Camille


----------



## traceya (Apr 26, 2010)

I'm not an expert in marketing or economics but I do know my own spending/reading habits. I love to read, I've always got at least one book on the go but in the past few years I've bought very, very few. I tend to borrow, use the library or splurge occasionally.

Since I bought my Kindle my number of books bought has increased ten fold if not more and most of those have been Indies charging $0.99 - $3.99 - why? Because I can afford that. Occasionally I've hit a bum read but at those prices I can afford a book I wasn't thrilled with at $20 [average price in Oz] I can't afford to make a mistake. As the economic market gets tougher and the price of simple things like groceries and gas keeps going up books become a luxury and at the prices Indies charge it's a luxury I can afford.

Do I think my work is worth as much as a traditionally published novel, well yes but I'll sell at lower prices because right now no one knows who on earth I am. When I'm as well known as Stephen King or J.K. Rowling then I'll charge more, until then I'm building a reputation, building a brand name and hopefully gathering a few faithful readers as I do so. If that means lower prices so be it.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> In your example, it's Author A, but you kind of cooked the books there since you got to make up the numbers.
> 
> I think a more apt question might be "Which author would you rather be, the one who has a small, dedicated fanbase who is willing to pay more for his/her work OR the one who has a larger overall readership, but whose fans are mostly casual and tend to come and go?"
> 
> Just to reiterate, I don't think I'm right and you're wrong. I'm still new to this whole discussion, and hopefully it's helping others as much as it's helping me.


Cooking the books is my privilege 

Firstly - I don't think fans who pay less are necessarily fly-by-night. I'm a HUGE (huge, huge, huge) David Dalglish fan. If he suddenly raised his prices to $10 a book, yeah, I'd still buy. But it probably wouldn't be on release day. And the other two authors I would have tried that same month? Sorry guys, my book budget ran out - I'm re-reading for the rest of the month. If I'm still thinking about you next month, I may try you then. That's that fixed book budget, hard at work. Higher prices just mean less books get bought, IMO.

As for your last question - I don't have a book out (yet) - but if I did, I'd rather be the author who was able to quit my day job and write full time ;-)


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> But you're making assumptions about the budgets of people who can't afford expensive books. Being one of them, I resent this.
> 
> I think you're getting a little mixed up about the importance of that budget too. You say you aren't someone who needs to buy 50 books a year. Well, okay, good for you, I guess.
> 
> ...


Maybe I should've been more clear in my comment. I resented Arkali's assumption about my household budget, because he/she knows nothing about me. A book budget, on the other hand, is something that I have no problems discussing. In fact, I think it's one of the most eye-opening things of this thread for me. I don't buy enough books per year that I need a budget just for books. Clearly, other people (a lot more people than I realized) do need such a budget, because they are buying far more books.

My goal is not for myself or for other authors to price books so high that they become unaffordable for most people. My goal was simply to point out that $2.99 is (in my opinion) a lower price than it needed to be.

For those people who say they won't (or don't like to) buy books over $2.99 because they buy so many, they are the ones buying all those books in the first place - they're creating their own limitation. They could easily buy one less $2.99 book each month and buy put that $3 into a $5 book. But if they would rather have 100 books at $2.99, who am I to stop them? As I said earlier, it's what the market will bear.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> In your example, it's Author A, but you kind of cooked the books there since you got to make up the numbers.
> 
> I think a more apt question might be "Which author would you rather be, the one who has a small, dedicated fanbase who is willing to pay more for his/her work OR the one who has a larger overall readership, but whose fans are mostly casual and tend to come and go?"
> 
> Just to reiterate, I don't think I'm right and you're wrong. I'm still new to this whole discussion, and hopefully it's helping others as much as it's helping me.


She didn't cook the books. If you go by the numbers of those who have tested this (such as Joe Konrath) then her numbers are actually conservative. There's a reason he likes the 2.99 price point - he's making a lot more money at it.

Your question is fine, except that I don't think those two elements are actually connected. The dedication of your fans has to do with your book and your relationship with the fan. They might be a big fanbase (such as for Twilight) or they might be a tiny one. They won't be dedicated to you because they have money. They will be a mix of budgets.

Odds are if your fan base is small, you won't have as many people who can afford a higher price. And if they can't afford you, they may still buy some of your books, but they won't be able to buy as many or buy as quickly, and they will likely resort to alternative means. (Used, borrowing, piracy.)

In terms of a writer's selfish economics, you have to find the sweet spot for your audience and books - what price gets you the highest overall return? Every book and every writer is different. But overall, it seems to fall in the under $5 area - for ebooks. (When you start talking about he dedicated fan, a cheap ebook and an expensive print book can bring you good income.)

Camille


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> Maybe I should've been more clear in my comment. I resented Arkali's assumption about my household budget, because he/she knows nothing about me. A book budget, on the other hand, is something that I have no problems discussing. In fact, I think it's one of the most eye-opening things of this thread for me. I don't buy enough books per year that I need a budget just for books. Clearly, other people (a lot more people than I realized) do need such a budget, because they are buying far more books.


Just to clarify, I wasn't wanting to discuss your household budget - ie. how much money you make or anything like that. I was merely commenting that your comment about "That's only an extra $60 per year!" implies that you don't specifically budget. As to the rest - most people have money set aside for "entertainment" if they stick to a budget. My book budget falls under that, and I actually shave money from other areas to pay for books (only seeing a couple of movies per year in theaters, for instance). $1 - $2 more per book is actually a pretty big deal to me, extrapolated out to the number of books I buy. Like I (and others) have said - avid readers won't stop reading, they'll just fall back to other ways to get books for less money - whether that means garage sales, loans from friends, the library, re-reading, whatever. I honestly don't see how that's a good thing for authors as a whole.



> They could easily buy one less $2.99 book each month and buy put that $3 into a $5 book. But if they would rather have 100 books at $2.99, who am I to stop them? As I said earlier, it's what the market will bear.


Right. But I'm still going to read the same amount per month. I'm not going to read slower because I spent $6 on one book instead of two. So where does that book come from? Not from new book sales. So an author, somewhere, just lost a sale. Again - I don't see how that's good for writers.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Nick Fox said:


> Maybe I should've been more clear in my comment. I resented Arkali's assumption about my household budget, because he/she knows nothing about me. A book budget, on the other hand, is something that I have no problems discussing. In fact, I think it's one of the most eye-opening things of this thread for me. I don't buy enough books per year that I need a budget just for books. Clearly, other people (a lot more people than I realized) do need such a budget, because they are buying far more books.
> 
> My goal is not for myself or for other authors to price books so high that they become unaffordable for most people. My goal was simply to point out that $2.99 is (in my opinion) a lower price than it needed to be.
> 
> For those people who say they won't (or don't like to) buy books over $2.99 because they buy so many, they are the ones buying all those books in the first place - they're creating their own limitation. They could easily buy one less $2.99 book each month and buy put that $3 into a $5 book. But if they would rather have 100 books at $2.99, who am I to stop them? As I said earlier, it's what the market will bear.


Actually, the only one making assumptions seems to be you. No one asked how much your household or book budget was.

When it somes to my monthly budget, things like books and movies have a very low priority. During months when things are tight, my budger for those things becomes tighter. I am less willing to shell out money for an expensive ebook or go to that movie. I won't try out that new or relatively unkonwn author who sets his price at $6.99 or go see that blockbuster movie that may or may not be good. I'll opt for something cheaper (a $2.99 book that I find appealing or a matinee showing).

EDIT: Arkali beat me to responding.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

Arkali said:


> $1 - $2 more per book is actually a pretty big deal to me, extrapolated out to the number of books I buy.


I wholly agree with this Arkali. $1 -$2 more if you buy 5 books or less a year is one thing, and not that big a difference. But, if you go off of just the 300 I read in the last year, (which is NOT all that I purchased) that's and extra $300-$600. That's a HUGE difference. I would say total in the last 12 months I actually purchased about 500 books, which means $500-$1000 extra. I don't have that much extra $ just laying around.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Arkali said:


> Right. But I'm still going to read the same amount per month. I'm not going to read slower because I spent $6 on one book instead of two. So where does that book come from? Not from new book sales. So an author, somewhere, just lost a sale. Again - I don't see how that's good for writers.


Not to sound like a callous jerk (maybe it's too late for that), but why should I care than another author lost a sale? If you buy Author A's $6 book and that means you choose not to buy Author B's $3 book this month, that's just too bad for Author B. Of course, I would love for all writers to do as well as possible (it's the exact reason I started this thread), but our work exists in a competitive marketplace.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

kyrin said:


> EDIT: Arkali beat me to responding.


Heh. I have an advantage. I'm re-downloading ALL my books right now (new Kindle after the mysterious "blotch" appeared on my last). GRRR. Anyway, I'll download 10 and then flip back to this tab, then download 10 more, etc. It's keeping me from NERDRAGE right now 



BTackitt said:


> I wholly agree with this Arkali. $1 -$2 more if you buy 5 books or less a year is one thing, and not that big a difference. But, if you go off of just the 300 I read in the last year, (which is NOT all that I purchased) that's and extra $300-$600. That's a HUGE difference. I would say total in the last 12 months I actually purchased about 500 books, which means $500-$1000 extra. I don't have that much extra $ just laying around.


Yepper. It adds up. And that was my point. $1 here and there isn't going to break the bank. But I don't read books "here and there" and that extra dollar would break the bank if I didn't adjust. And the adjustment isn't going to come from how many books I read - it will come from how many books I buy.



> Not to sound like a callous jerk (maybe it's too late for that), but why should I care than another author lost a sale? If you buy Author A's $6 book and that means you choose not to buy Author B's $3 book this month, that's just too bad for Author B. Of course, I would love for all writers to do as well as possible (it's the exact reason I started this thread), but our work exists in a competitive marketplace.


*shrug* It's all well and good to just care about your books and your sales as opposed to the health of the industry as a whole, I suppose. Until it's your own book that doesn't get bought because someone just spent $8 on Book 5 of the Half-Orc series. No one author can corner the market. Short-sighted "Eff everybody else, I'ma get MINE!" doesn't necessarily do you any favors. * 


Spoiler



* That's a general "you", not a specific you.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

A "for sale" price may not be a "selling price". And what is one person's purchase price point, is not necessarily someone else's. 
There are Indie authors out there selling at $8/book. and they are happy getting fewer sales with more return. *I* personally will never know if their writing is any good because that is over *MY* personal limit for a book.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Totally off topic but someone's avatar has me hypnotized.


----------



## Carolyn Kephart (Feb 23, 2009)

BTackitt said:


> A "for sale" price may not be a "selling price". And what is one person's purchase price point, is not necessarily someone else's.
> There are Indie authors out there selling at $8/book. and they are happy getting fewer sales with more return. *I* personally will never know if their writing is any good because that is over *MY* personal limit for a book.


Love your new Halloween avatar. 

I've priced my books at 99 cents in the past and sold bunches, but I always wondered how often I was ending up underneath a massive TBR pile, never to see the light of day. Kyrin's comment about being able to play around with pricing if one has several books for sale is spot on. I know money's tight for a lot of people nowadays and I sympathize, so for November I'll be offering some bargains.

CK


----------



## amanda_hocking (Apr 24, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> I find it really interesting that you, as an author, still think like a consumer when it comes to ebooks.


I may be misreading that, but I feel like you're saying that as a bad thing. Of course I'm thinking like a consumer. I made a product with a consumer in mind, which makes it much easier to market.

Based on your arguments, I don't understand why I would want to raise my prices. I get emails and comments from readers all the time saying how much they appreciate my reasonably priced books. I have a big fan base with stay-at-home moms and college students and just people generally fighting the bad economy.

My fanbase also tends to be voracious readers - which is why they bought the Kindle. That's something else not often taken into consideration. In order for people to buy a Kindle, they tend read a lot - and that's where the extra $1-2 really comes into play. Casual readers who only buy the occasional best seller aren't going to buy a Kindle because they can't justify it, and they're the market that wouldn't feel the higher price per book. Bu they're also not likely to read a book by a relatively unknown author.

But aside for that, I remember their being something about said about having a 1,000 true fans. When the fourth book in my series came out, I sold 1,000 books on that title in the first two days. That was because readers were waiting for it to come out, and bought it right away.

A lot of readers did only purchase one of my books because they were in a reasonable price range, but then went on to buy all my books. I have six books out right now. Five them are priced at 2.99, and one is .99. Because I was had low prices that attracted one reader, that turned into $16. That puts $10.85 in my pocket.

I could raise my prices and still get readers, especially with new books in a series. But why? I would lose sales, which may not effect my overall income because I'm charging more per book, but that would hurt my ranking on Amazon. And as David Dalglish said earlier, a hard part of being indie is visibility. All six of my books are almost always in the top 1,000, and they have rankings in the top Top 100 in categories like Teen and Horror, which makes it easier for readers to find my books. If they fell off those lists, I lose some extra visibility, which means I'd lose some more sales.

But beyond all that - I am making a living writing full time, pricing my books at $2.99. I probably could make more money if I priced my books. But why? I'd alienate some readers I already have, and even if I didn't, I'd feel uncomfortable with it. Because I still don't want to pay more than $2.99 for a book, so charging more would only come out of greed.

And I said it earlier. This isn't an issue of an indie book being an inferior product and my books not deserving the same price as J. K. Rowling or Stephen King. Ebooks just aren't worth $9.99. I think $5.99 is even pushing it.

In the end, the $2.99 has worked out really well for me, as well as many other authors, so I think there's something to it.

Also, be aware that readers do read this threads, and I know they take offense when they feel like authors talk about them as dollar signs. So be careful of how you phrase things. Readers deserve respect and consideration. And I think part of that is not charging them more than I'd be willing to be.

So... the end.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> Not to sound like a callous jerk (maybe it's too late for that), but why should I care than another author lost a sale? If you buy Author A's $6 book and that means you choose not to buy Author B's $3 book this month, that's just too bad for Author B. Of course, I would love for all writers to do as well as possible (it's the exact reason I started this thread), but our work exists in a competitive marketplace.


And you're assuming that you are Author A.

I think the thing you're not getting is that those writers who are doing best - better than anyone can imagine, as a matter of fact - are those selling at a cheaper price. You said you're new to this discussion, so maybe it's just that you don't have the same background and don't realize that we're not talking theoretically. People are giving you theory to explain why, but $2.99 or so seems to be the sweet spot where authors make the most money.

If that's why you started the thread, then there's your answer - *we sell at "only" $2.99 because that's where you make the bucks.*

The more valid question is: if you make less money at another price point, why would you sell at that other price point? Find the price that works for you and use it. Don't get hung up that it's higher or lower than you expected.

Camille


----------



## amanda_hocking (Apr 24, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> If that's why you started the thread, then there's your answer - *we sell at "only" $2.99 because that's where you make the bucks.*
> 
> The more valid question is: if you make less money at another price point, why would you sell at that other price point? Find the price that works for you and use it. Don't get hung up that it's higher or lower than you expected.
> 
> Camille


Exactly.


----------



## intinst (Dec 23, 2008)

amanda_hocking said:


> Also, be aware that readers do read this threads, and I know they take offense when they feel like authors talk about them as dollar signs. So be careful of how you phrase things. Readers deserve respect and consideration. And I think part of that is not charging them more than I'd be willing to be.
> 
> So... the end.


I believe it is too late to worry about that now.


----------



## amanda_hocking (Apr 24, 2010)

intinst said:


> I believe it is too late to worry about that now.


I apologize if I said something to offend.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

amanda_hocking said:


> I apologize if I said something to offend.


I think he meant the overall thread - since you were warning someone else about being careful of dismissive talk about prices and budgets and buying habits. It IS too late for that, I think. But I think the warning is still well taken, since Nick is new and will undoubtedly continue to post on other threads.

Camille


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

amanda_hocking said:


> I apologize if I said something to offend.


I could be wrong, but I'm guessing he's referring to the fact that pricing has been a hot topic for a while now


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Arkali said:


> I could be wrong, but I'm guessing he's referring to the fact that pricing has been a hot topic for a while now


I hope that's not it. Honestly, I'm sick of the topic. But, many writers here, this is a business, and part of that business is pricing. It's not meant to be insulting at all. It's just one of the many marketing decisions an indie has to make.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Monique said:


> I hope that's not it. Honestly, I'm sick of the topic. But, many writers here, this is a business, and part of that business is pricing. It's not meant to be insulting at all. It's just one of the many marketing decisions an indie has to make.


Eh, I think Intinst was being tongue-in-cheek


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Arkali said:


> I could be wrong, but I'm guessing he's referring to the fact that pricing has been a hot topic for a while now


Pricing is a frequent topic, and although in a different thread I started thinking out loud on the boards about the money it takes to make sure an eBook is well-copy-edited and publicized, Amanda's words of wisdom have reminded me that one can overthink the economics of this too much.

So I'll go back to what I said about a month ago:

As authors, we build our brand by telling great stories. That builds trust in readers that our next stories will be great, too. So they keep coming back for more, because they had a pleasant experience reading us last time.

I'll briefly recite the Stephen King example...

CARRIE wasn't sold to the public in 1973 or whenever on Stephen King's name, because no one knew him yet.

CARRIE also wasn't sold on price... no one said, "Check out CARRIE by Stephen King... it's only $7.95 in hardcover!"

CARRIE was sold on the primal power of the story King was telling: A teenage outcast girl has the WORST prom night ever... but this time, they picked on the wrong girl... because Carrie White has power... the power to strike back!

That's how CARRIE was sold.

Then 'SALEM'S LOT was sold on the power of people enjoying CARRIE... Not on price... "From the author of CARRIE comes a brand new type of vampire story... You don't want to miss... 'SALEM'S LOT!"

And by the time THE SHINING was released, King's name was starting to become a brand because people had loved both CARRIE and 'SALEM'S LOT... So it became... Can a house possess a man's soul? Find out as Stephen King, the author of CARRIE and 'SALEM'S LOT, brings you a tale so terrifying, Stanley Kubrick will make the worst film adaptation of it ever known to man!"  LOL (King HATED the Kubrick version because Jack Nicholson looked certifiable from the first frame he appears in... and King's tale was supposed to be about how a nice, normal guy gets corrupted... not someone who looks corrupted from the word go.)

None of those books were sold on price. King has NEVER been sold on price.

We could all learn from that.

Tell great stories. Keep telling more great stories. That's how you build your brand...

Good to remember that... speaking personally, I'd let cost considerations get to me a bit.

But telling great stories well will make every other consideration fade away... that's our job as writers. First and foremost. Write well, entrance the reader, leave them wanting more... Price won't matter if we're doing that, no matter whether it's $2.99 or $0.99 or $3.99 or $9.99...

Just worry about our craft and our stories and being the best we can be... and then, maybe a little better.

Do that, and everything else falls into place.


----------



## Imogen Rose (Mar 22, 2010)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> Pricing is a frequent topic, and although in a different thread I started thinking out loud on the boards about the money it takes to make sure an eBook is well-copy-edited and publicized, Amanda's words of wisdom have reminded me that one can overthink the economics of this too much.
> 
> So I'll go back to what I said about a month ago:
> 
> ...


I agree, but someone had to market that book. No one would have know about Carrie, if it had not been for effective marketing. That's where, in my opinion, indies differ from Stephen King. We don't have a publishing house behind us, so we need to find our own methods to market, and sometime price can be an effective marketing tool.


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

When it comes right down to it, I think taking the lead from Amazon is a good idea. They price their bestselling ebooks at $9.99 and they suggest the lowest price indies should price their books is $2.99. Where an individual author falls within that range is entirely up to him or her. Personally, I think that receiving $2 for every book sale is enough of a reward for the effort I put into fiction writing. Non fiction, on the other hand, is a little different. I have spent decades building up the knowledge to be able to write those bloody things and price them at $2.99 per topic (think chapter), and collect all related chapters and sell an anthology at $5.99. 

Another factor is that people are still thinking in a physical book way and have yet to fully exploit all the possibilities of ebooks. Why sell a novel as one piece of work? With ebooks, it is possible to break it up into chunks, say 20,000 words each, and sell each section individually for a lower price. A collection of all the parts can then be sold at a discount on the cost of purchasing each one separately.


----------



## RodGovers (Jun 7, 2010)

In the last hour I've bought six 'indie' books that were mentioned on the Amazon Kindle forum.  They ranged in price from $2.39 to $2.99.  In the past week, I guess I've bought 20 or so books.

The thing is these were impulse buys but if they had been $5 or $6, I wouldn't have bought them.  For $2-3 I'm willing to risk it (and it is a risk with the really poor formatting, editing, spelling etc . that features in so many ebooks  - don't authors read their books before publishing?  And this applies to mainstream published ebooks as well).

From a reader's POV, it's highly likely, almost certain, that I would NEVER have bought any of these books if they had been paper books - unknown authors with only a review or three.

And like most ereader owners, right or wrong, I believe ebooks have to be a very reasonable price because you never actually own them.

I also believe, like what happen with music, overpriced digital product encourages piracy.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

By my count there have been at least two threads on pricing elasticity.  Has anyone actually done a study to determine if pricing does change buyer habits?  Of late, I have only been getting about one sale per week.  I think that I will up my book to $3.99 and see if that totally kills the demand.

There is, of course, a contrarian view that says pricing books so under what bricks and mortar publishers charge diminishes the perceived value of our books.  

Edited to add:  I raised my price to $3.99 and as soon as it goes live, I will report back on whether my pricing strategy worked or not.  Understand that although it has appeared on some popular book lists and I have made the rounds of many blogs, it hasn't caught the reading public's eye.  If I continue to get only one per week, it will be telling.  If not, then pricing can be considered a factor even with people actually searching for my book.  I'm due to be listed on DailyCheapReads in the month of November.  It may get a pop from that listing and we will see if the $1.00 change makes a difference.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

Nick Fox said:


> If you're right about this, then we're all in trouble, because the average cost of production on an ebook is pretty close to $0.


Not if you buy artwork, spend some money on an editor and do any promo. There's the cost of time and there's also the cost of keeping up a website or blog. You can get it close to zero or even zero if you really want to, but in general, almost everyone on this board is constantly trying to improve quality. That means even if we start at 99 cents, if we sell, we're going to put that money back in. We're going to hire a second set of eyeballs to proofread and we're going to go after the best art we can afford.

I did my own artwork for Sage--but I paid over 100 dollars for Adobe Illustrated. I could possibly have spent less but in general, there is going to be some cost to recover.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

Arkali said:


> I'm a HUGE (huge, huge, huge) David Dalglish fan. If he suddenly raised his prices to $10 a book, yeah, I'd still buy. But it probably wouldn't be on release day.


*David's ears perk up, and when he blinks, it makes a cartoon cash register noise*

Ahem, sorry, where were we? Oh yes, charge more, charge less. This is getting rather old. Those who want to charge more...well, nothing's stopping you. Go for it! Try for the higher-paying audience. But odds are high that unless you've got one heck of an advertising plan, you'll be languishing in the 100ks in ratings. Not to say that switching your books to 0.99-2.99 won't result in immediate sub-1k ratings, either though.

To the readers that might have stumbled on this thread: No, you aren't walking dollar signs. However, many of us here want to eat, as well as not feel inferior to 'traditionally' published books. For whatever reason, people seem to first approach the price at trying to fix these ideas.

David Dalglish


----------



## theaatkinson (Sep 22, 2010)

RodGovers said:


> In the last hour I've bought six 'indie' books that were mentioned on the Amazon Kindle forum. They ranged in price from $2.39 to $2.99. In the past week, I guess I've bought 20 or so books.
> 
> The thing is these were impulse buys but if they had been $5 or $6, I wouldn't have bought them. For $2-3 I'm willing to risk it (and it is a risk with the really poor formatting, editing, spelling etc . that features in so many ebooks - don't authors read their books before publishing? And this applies to mainstream published ebooks as well).
> 
> ...


I'm very glad to see a reader chime in. Thanks for the info.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

amanda_hocking said:


> I may be misreading that, but I feel like you're saying that as a bad thing. Of course I'm thinking like a consumer. I made a product with a consumer in mind, which makes it much easier to market.


I wasn't saying it was a bad thing, I just find myself thinking from a writer's point of view and not a consumer's point of view, so I think it's interested that you do the opposite. I think that even moreso as you have numerous books available on Kindle, and I have none. I don't have a real horse in this race (yet), just a hypothetical one.

That being said, I agree with the sentiment here that as an author, I wouldn't want to charge more than I'm willing to pay myself. It seems like the difference is that I'm willing to pay a little more than most people, because of my different buying habits and the fact that I buy a lot less than 1 book a day, or 3 books a week, etc.



amanda_hocking said:


> But aside for that, I remember their being something about said about having a 1,000 true fans. When the fourth book in my series came out, I sold 1,000 books on that title in the first two days. That was because readers were waiting for it to come out, and bought it right away.
> 
> A lot of readers did only purchase one of my books because they were in a reasonable price range, but then went on to buy all my books. I have six books out right now. Five them are priced at 2.99, and one is .99. Because I was had low prices that attracted one reader, that turned into $16. That puts $10.85 in my pocket.
> 
> I could raise my prices and still get readers, especially with new books in a series. But why? I would lose sales, which may not effect my overall income because I'm charging more per book, but that would hurt my ranking on Amazon. And as David Dalglish said earlier, a hard part of being indie is visibility. All six of my books are almost always in the top 1,000, and they have rankings in the top Top 100 in categories like Teen and Horror, which makes it easier for readers to find my books. If they fell off those lists, I lose some extra visibility, which means I'd lose some more sales.


Thanks for posting all that. It's good to see some actual numbers, and I do think David's point from earlier about visibility should be considered very carefully.



amanda_hocking said:


> Also, be aware that readers do read this threads, and I know they take offense when they feel like authors talk about them as dollar signs. So be careful of how you phrase things. Readers deserve respect and consideration. And I think part of that is not charging them more than I'd be willing to be.
> 
> So... the end.


I appreciate your warning, and I do hope that everyone here understand I'm talking hypothetically. I'm not trying to insult anyone's books, pricing strategies, or the readers of those books. I firmly believe that people should do whatever they feel is best for them, and many people have given me reasons _why_ they do what they do.

I purposefully made this thread in the Writer's Cafe (and not another forum) to spur discussion, and the insights and opinions I've gained from others here far outweigh (for me) how anyone views me. I knew it wouldn't sit well with some people, but as of this posting it's gotten over 1100 views in about 12 hours, so even though it's not a popular topic with many, it's one that a lot of people have wanted to check out. And that tells me that it was a discussion worth having.


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

Nick Fox said:


> For those people who say they won't (or don't like to) buy books over $2.99 because they buy so many, they are the ones buying all those books in the first place - they're creating their own limitation. They could easily buy one less $2.99 book each month and buy put that $3 into a $5 book. But if they would rather have 100 books at $2.99, who am I to stop them? As I said earlier, it's what the market will bear.


I'm sorry, but I will *not *buy one less book a month. I'm an avid reader on an average income and I've always bought my books at library sales, garage sales, used book stores, anyplace I can get them cheaply. I used to work next door to a library. You could fill up a paper grocery bag with books for $5. Now that I have my Kindle, even paying as little as $2.99 is stretching it. Picking up the freebies and the 99 centers allows me the freedom to pay $2.99 on occasion.



Nick Fox said:


> Not to sound like a callous jerk (maybe it's too late for that), but why should I care than another author lost a sale? If you buy Author A's $6 book and that means you choose not to buy Author B's $3 book this month, that's just too bad for Author B. Of course, I would love for all writers to do as well as possible (it's the exact reason I started this thread), but our work exists in a competitive marketplace.


It's exactly that attitude that will defeat us. We stick together, we talk about marketing and pricing and difficulties we have in writing. We beta read each others books and rejoice in sales and commiserate when sales are down. We give each other tips on where and how to promote and do everything we can to help each other. What's good for one of us is good for all of us, because first we have to eliminate the stigma of being indies. That should be our priority. Write the best book that we can, make sure it is as mistake free as we can make it, and then price it so people will buy and say,

"I bought this book because of the price, but it was surprisingly good. Maybe I'll try a couple of other indie authors."


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

> It seems there are a lot of voracious readers out there who own Kindles and demand cheap books so they can satisfy the constant urge to read. I'm not like that. I don't buy 5 books per year, but I'm not buying 50 either. So I don't mind spending a little more per book if it means I know I'm going to enjoy it. But if I read 100 books per year like some people here clearly do, I might have a different outlook.


You're missing an entire audience if you think it is just Kindle owners who demand a low price. I think we've said it enough: Used book buyers, retirees, library goers, bargain hunters. They were there before kindle and not spending their dollars on new books. They are there now and some of them are Kindle owners. Guess what price range they shop in All we've done is open up the "new" book market for them (and ourselves!)

Some library goers check out 15 books PER WEEK. They read them all. This type of reader is not likely to BUY 15 books per week no matter what her budget is. It's easier to go load up at the library and far cheaper. When you're used to library prices (the price of a card) you aren't going to go to B&N or the Kindle store and start shoveling 8 dollar paperbacks into your cart. Even if you had the money, it doesn't make a lot of sense.

Now, as an author, do I want to target the lady who reads 15 books per week or the lady who buys an occasional book at Walmart or B&N? Let' see...which audience is going to be easier to reach? Which one is likely to come back for more quicker? Don't get me wrong. I want them both. But I *understand* the 15/week lady. I've spoken with her. I might have even *been* her at one time...

And I still do not think that indies "undercut" other authors or publishers. I agree with the person who said something to the effect of "If books were more expensive, I would not buy the same number of books." All we are doing is allowing more purchase power. I'm more than happy to share that space with David and Amanda and Karen and Jim...


----------



## N. Gemini Sasson (Jul 5, 2010)

Imogen Rose said:


> I agree, but someone had to market that book. No one would have know about Carrie, if it had not been for effective marketing. That's where, in my opinion, indies differ from Stephen King. We don't have a publishing house behind us, so we need to find our own methods to market, and sometime price can be an effective marketing tool.


Couldn't agree more, Imogen.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Gertie Kindle 'a/k/a Margaret Lake' said:


> It's exactly that attitude that will defeat us. We stick together, we talk about marketing and pricing and difficulties we have in writing. We beta read each others books and rejoice in sales and commiserate when sales are down. We give each other tips on where and how to promote and do everything we can to help each other. What's good for one of us is good for all of us, because first we have to eliminate the stigma of being indies. That should be our priority. Write the best book that we can, make sure it is as mistake free as we can make it, and then price it so people will buy and say,


Of course I see the value in exchanging ideas about marketing and writing, and being a support group to help out in the bad times and celebrate the good. But when you have a good month selling your books, you don't cut a check for $3 and send it to a writer who had a bad month. At the end of the day, all books exist in a competitive marketplace, and there's no getting away from that.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

MariaESchneider said:


> Some library goers check out 15 books PER WEEK. They read them all. This type of reader is not likely to BUY 15 books per week no matter what her budget is. It's easier to go load up at the library and far cheaper. When you're used to library prices (the price of a card) you aren't going to go to B&N or the Kindle store and start shoveling 8 dollar paperbacks into your cart. Even if you had the money, it doesn't make a lot of sense.
> 
> Now, as an author, do I want to target the lady who reads 15 books per week or the lady who buys an occasional book at Walmart or B&N?


So in this example, is your goal to become one of those 15 books? From my perspective, it sounds like that reader is more than happy to get free books from the library, so why would they ever bother spending any amount, be it 2.99 or higher, on an ebook? I think we just have a different perspective on the whole thing, that's all.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

FWIW, as a reader, I have come to "know" many of you authors here on the boards, and I know you are genuinely interested in your: a) craft, b)reader response (how many posts per week about either I got blasted by a review, or OMG this review made my week!), c)miscellaneous, d) sales - where pricing comes in to play.

I do find it very interesting that when talking abstract, the OP is very,"prices should be higher" minded, but when talking about true numbers of books *I* have purchased/read, the OP becomes silent. Nick, I would not have posted those posts without expecting to discuss them in a reasonable manner. I will not get offended by rational reasoning.

Also, you ask why writers are thinking like consumers when they price? remember, they too are consumers. They read books. Why should they price their work above what they are willing to pay for an equal commodity?

You say that I could buy one less book per month to pay a higher price on another. Yes, you are right, but, I like trying indie authors. I have found some wonderful authors this way. if I buy one less book, that could be the best author ever, and I would never know it. The same as an indie author who overprices them selves. Why should I spend $6-$8 on 1 book when I have no idea whether it will be any good? $2.99 is a reasonable price for a book that I know doesn't have to pay any shipping, storage, middleman costs. Yes, I know *GOOD* indie authors pay for things like cover art, proofreading, editing; and yes, I pay more for those indies who have a proven track record, to me. I can think of 10 authors here on the boards that I am willing to pay $3.99-$4.99 for their books, reverse side of that, I have found a couple I would not take for FREE.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

Nick Fox said:


> Of course I see the value in exchanging ideas about marketing and writing, and being a support group to help out in the bad times and celebrate the good. But when you have a good month selling your books, you don't cut a check for $3 and send it to a writer who had a bad month. At the end of the day, all books exist in a competitive marketplace, and there's no getting away from that.


But to some extent a rising tide lifts all boats. Together we are stronger for it. I don't compete directly with the Davids who write horror stories because my books aren't horror. But his books are well-liked, loved even. By helping HIM, I help myself. Why? Because he's indie. And he's good. And for EVERY indie who catches on the rest of us stand a chance of "being tried." If someone asks on a forum for a horror book at a reasonable price, guess what? I'm not going to suggest my books because I don't write horror. But for every person who "buys-in" to Indie it helps the rest of us.

The economics of it are not simple and not all one crowd. And books are read and then more are needed. Kindle has caused a huge enthusiasm for buying books and reading them. Our job as authors is to keep that momentum going.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

BTW, thinking Kindle owners don't KNOW that authors who price above $2.99 get 70% of the royalties is about equal to thinking Kindle owners have no clue. Amazon has pushed that pricing platform all over the place in announcements, press releases, etc. One could never have talked with authors and know that bit of information. So we too can do math. 

Also, If I am trying out a new author, and I see that they have 3 books in a series, if the prices are $2.99 or less, I am very likely to buy all 3 at the same time without having read book 1. (btw this happens ALOT with me, ergo my large TBR which I plow through fairly rapidly.) If the books are priced $4.99 and above, I will only buy 1 of those 3 books, and I will mentally be less forgiving of ANY errors in the book. Guess which author has more $ in their pocket now? It's not the second one. and later when each publishes a new book, guess which one I will probably spend $ on?


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

Nick Fox said:


> Of course I see the value in exchanging ideas about marketing and writing, and being a support group to help out in the bad times and celebrate the good. But when you have a good month selling your books, you don't cut a check for $3 and send it to a writer who had a bad month. At the end of the day, all books exist in a competitive marketplace, and there's no getting away from that.


Not really. I'm not competing against Jeff Hepple, Mike Hicks, Maria Schneider, David Dalglish, David McAfee, Amanda Hocking, and a host of others. We all have our separate group of readers. Yes, there's some crossover, but it is minimal.

I write historical fiction/romance. If I read a book in that genre and really loved it, should I not write a good review for that book because I'm in competition with that author? I don't think you would, but I would, because firstly, I want to share something I loved, and secondly, as Maria said, "But to some extent a rising tide lifts all boats."

I work hard to promote my books. I've been especially active and am doing well in the UK. I have two books priced at $2.99 and two priced at $0.99 (novelettes). Which books do you think are selling? The 99 centers at nearly five to one. One of the reasons people buy kindles is the expectation that they can buy cheap books. Lots of threads over there about overpriced ebooks. It's a shock to them that publishers like Penguin are asking $14.99 for an ebook. So they're turning to us and the big reason is price.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

> I work hard to promote my books. I've been especially active and am doing well in the UK. I have two books priced at $2.99 and two priced at $0.99 (novelettes). Which books do you think are selling? The 99 centers at nearly five to one. One of the reasons people buy kindles is the expectation that they can buy cheap books. Lots of threads over there about overpriced ebooks. It's a shock to them that publishers like Penguin are asking $14.99 for an ebook. So they're turning to us and the big reason is price.


And 99 cents is the equivalent of impulse buying at the checkout stand. Standing there in line, that candy bar looks good...

I just finished a traditionally published book that cost me $8.50. As Btackitt mentioned, I'm harder on that book than I would have been for a $2.99 book. The book was worth $2.99. But 8.50? For a book that had a transition that felt like there was at LEAST one page missing? A book that used some Victorian terms that...well, okay maybe *people* talked like that, but a werewolf? Can anyone *seriously* tell me that a macho werewolf would ever use the term "balderdash?" And the ending turned into a mess of...oh, the point is for 8.50 I wanted an editor who maybe pointed out that improvements could have been made. I wanted a little bit more for my money. I sure as heck needed more for 8.50 to convince me to buy the next book. Were the next book $2.99--I'd be more inclined to get it because that isn't a lot of money for a few laughs and some eye-rolling.

It's a value thing. As an author, I am not going to assume I'm an $8.50 book. Maybe I am, maybe I'm not. I want to provide good value to the reader--an hour or five of enjoyment. I really don't want the reader to finish the book and be thinking... was that worth 10 bucks? I want to make it easy. I want the reader to not even think about it, and if anything, come away thinking they got the bargain of the century.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

Nick Fox said:


> So in this example, is your goal to become one of those 15 books? From my perspective, it sounds like that reader is more than happy to get free books from the library, so why would they ever bother spending any amount, be it 2.99 or higher, on an ebook? I think we just have a different perspective on the whole thing, that's all.


YES! My goal is EXACTLY that. The lady who reads 15 books per week ALSO makes purchases--probably more often than a lot of people. She's going to pick up a book anywhere she sees it and give it a look. If she owns a kindle she's going to be the first in line at the bargain thread. She's an avid reader. She's a return customer. She is going to be a person who can and will talk "books." She will try most anything. If she likes it, she's going to come back for more.

One other point. When I sell my kindle book for $2.99, I am making almost as much as a traditional author makes on a hardback. (I do believe traditional authors are grossly underpaid for their efforts.) If I can sell a book for $4.99, I'm making as much as a traditional author would on a hardback and *more* than they make on a paperback (I'm excluding the likes of Stephen King for this discussion. I am not King, I don't look like King (thank God), I do not write like King (little less of thank God) nor did I sleep at a Holiday Inn!)


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

MariaESchneider said:


> And 99 cents is the equivalent of impulse buying at the checkout stand. Standing there in line, that candy bar looks good...


Oh, thanks, Maria. Now I need chocolate.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

I am truly amazed a topic held together for 4 pages before OT interests came in. 
mmmm chocolate..

err.. ahem..

yeah.. $.99 is impulse shopping. $2.99 is beginning of the "think about it" pricing.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

BTackitt said:


> I am truly amazed a topic held together for 4 pages before OT interests came in.
> mmmm chocolate..
> 
> err.. ahem..
> ...


Chocolate is *never* OT. Never!


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

BTackitt said:


> yeah.. $.99 is impulse shopping. $2.99 is beginning of the "think about it" pricing.


I agree. The thing I wonder about 99 cent books is how many of those "impulse" buys end up at the bottom of the TBR. At $2.99, yes, the reader has given is some thought and is more likely to read it sooner rather than later.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

My TBR list may be a "bit" long... but it has no Bottom.. When I am ready for a new book to read, I flip through the pages of titles, looking at covers (which do remind me of what the book is), open the first page sometimes, until I get one I like. Sometimes I start on the first page of titles which are sorted by newest.. sometimes I start at the back of my list.. the oldest.. sometimes I skip to the middle.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

Oh and as to Pricing...

I certainly don't recall ONE author complaining when Amazon suddenly gave away 50+ indie books for free at the beginning of the month. (and there was one author lucky enough to have 4 of his books on that freebie list.) Numbers of sales went through the roof for some of them... and not just on the FREE books but for much of their list. As a matter of fact, When it happened again in Australia only, for aussie authors only, they were thrilled AGAIN, even if they had been part of the first group.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

BTackitt said:


> FWIW, as a reader, I have come to "know" many of you authors here on the boards, and I know you are genuinely interested in your: a) craft, b)reader response (how many posts per week about either I got blasted by a review, or OMG this review made my week!), c)miscellaneous, d) sales - where pricing comes in to play.
> 
> I do find it very interesting that when talking abstract, the OP is very,"prices should be higher" minded, but when talking about true numbers of books *I* have purchased/read, the OP becomes silent. Nick, I would not have posted those posts without expecting to discuss them in a reasonable manner. I will not get offended by rational reasoning.
> 
> ...


I haven't been silent on the amount of books I buy per year, if you read back you'll see I gave a range earlier. I probably read about 30 books a year, and they're generally longer books, made after careful selection. I am not an "impulse" reader. Of those 30, probably half of them are bought, and the other half are library/lend/some of form of free. It might help to add that so far these are all print books, as I do not yet own a Kindle. (I'm sure several people just fainted at their computers.)

I don't think it's quite fair to say that my points aren't "rational." What I'm finding is that I have quite a different perspective from many people here, and that's fine with me. We don't all need to be the same, and think the same.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

BTackitt said:


> BTW, thinking Kindle owners don't KNOW that authors who price above $2.99 get 70% of the royalties is about equal to thinking Kindle owners have no clue. Amazon has pushed that pricing platform all over the place in announcements, press releases, etc. One could never have talked with authors and know that bit of information. So we too can do math.


I don't think this is true. I don't think most readers in the general public have any idea how the publishing industry works, whether it be with print books or ebooks. Next time you're on the bus or the train and see someone reading a Kindle, ask them if they know the royalty rate for authors priced between 2.99 and 9.99. They'll look at you like you have three heads. Of course you're aware of it, because you're an author, and so are the other people who post here, but that is a tiny segment of the Kindle population.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

I didn't say anything about your reading habits or that your points were not rational. I said let's discuss MY reading habit of 300~ books/year. I just asked that I not get a rant in return.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

Nick Fox said:


> I don't think this is true. I don't think most readers in the general public have any idea how the publishing industry works, whether it be with print books or ebooks. Next time you're on the bus or the train and see someone reading a Kindle, ask them if they know the royalty rate for authors priced between 2.99 and 9.99. They'll look at you like you have three heads. Of course you're aware of it, because you're an author, and so are the other people who post here, but that is a tiny segment of the Kindle population.


I'm not an author. not at all.. well, ok.. only if you count 2 poems I wrote more than 20 years ago that got published.

26,000 members may be a tiny segment of the population, but we ARE a knowledgable segment, and represent a good portion of readers who do read more than 10 books a year.


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

Now we understand. You are among the poor, unfortunate Kindleless. Of course, if you only read 30 books a year, then the Kindle isn't for you. It's for us book addicts who haul around 10,000 books every time we move. That's a real number, Nick and doesn't include the couple of thousand that got ruined in a flood or the huge box that got stolen out of my garage. 

I just made a final book pruning, I hope, and I'm down to about 500. It feels weird to look at my shelves and see mostly dvds and knick-knacks.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

BTackitt said:


> I didn't say anything about your reading habits or that your points were not rational. I said let's discuss MY reading habit of 300~ books/year. I just asked that I not get a rant in return.


Sorry if I've misunderstood what you are trying to say. I thought you were trying to point out that although I was asking other people to discuss their own reading/buying habits, I wasn't willing to do the same.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Gertie Kindle 'a/k/a Margaret Lake' said:


> I write historical fiction/romance. If I read a book in that genre and really loved it, should I not write a good review for that book because I'm in competition with that author? I don't think you would, but I would, because firstly, I want to share something I loved, and secondly, as Maria said, "But to some extent a rising tide lifts all boats."


Just like you, I would write the review about that great book, and be happy doing it. I'm not looking to bash others to get ahead, or ignore other quality work, I'm just pointing out that there is natural competition in the marketplace. I often go out of my way to post on my Facebook, Twitter, etc. when I find a new product I like, whether it be a book or otherwise.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

Gertie Kindle 'a/k/a Margaret Lake' said:


> I just made a final book pruning, I hope, and I'm down to about 500. It feels weird to look at my shelves and see mostly dvds and knick-knacks.


Here's where I fainted. I could not go that far Gertie.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

To all of those who read 100+ books a year... where do you find the time? That's 2 books a week. I see estimates of people reading 300 books a year - that's almost a book every day. Do you not have to work, or is your sole use of free time reading?


----------



## Jnassise (Mar 22, 2010)

I read a MINIMUM of 4 books per week, often more.  I usually plow through about 150 pages in an hour, so all I need to do is find a few hours per week (over lunch, while waiting to pick up the kids at school, reading before bed at night).  I write full time and spend other leisure time with my wife and family.  I'm just a fast reader, that's all.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> I'm not looking to bash others to get ahead, or ignore other quality work, I'm just pointing out that there is natural competition in the marketplace.


It's funny, but when I was in business as a vendor of buttons at science fiction conventions - I learned very quickly that in business, competition is a whole different thing than most people think it is. The kind of competition you're talking about not a matter of business or economy - it's just an emotion some people feel. If you feel it, you should suppress it or channel it.

When your products are identical (or extremely similar) then yes, competition and the commodity model applies. But when you have an identity product, usually greater volume of products and "competitors", and the more cooperation among you, the better you all do. When I was a button dealer, I was not afraid of other button dealers. I would give them tips on suppliers and cons to attend. This was a great marketing tool for all of us. Dealers who behaved in an overly competitive manner tended to cut their own throats. The customers didn't like them because they were selfish and unhelpful and nobody was having a good time.

But I don't see how insisting on competition relates to why you want people to raise their prices. Is it just that we've disturbed the picture you have how things should be? I'm sure that there are some people who have priced at $2.99 because of competition (but most of them probably price lower). There are people who believe only in win-lose.

But I think the issue that you seem to be having the most trouble with is that so many here believe that it's either win-win, or it's lose-lose. We have come to the conclusion that cooperation (with readers and with other writers) to keep the price fair for all is the way we each individually prosper the most. It is a selfish and competitive thing. By doing this we beat those who don't cooperate and who price too high or low for the wrong reasons.

Camille


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> To all of those who read 100+ books a year... where do you find the time? That's 2 books a week. I see estimates of people reading 300 books a year - that's almost a book every day. Do you not have to work, or is your sole use of free time reading?


For fun I don't read nearly that many (alas). I used to read a book every day or two. And when I read slush, of course, I had to read more, and now most of what I read is for editing and critique.

There are a lot of enthusiastic and dedicated readers out there. Some are blessed with the ability to read fast. (I alas, have tracking problems and mild dyslexia, so I will never read as fast as most of my friends.)

Camille


----------



## intinst (Dec 23, 2008)

amanda_hocking said:


> I apologize if I said something to offend.


I am sorry that I was not more clear. I was agreeing with your statements. There are many readers that do read the threads in the cafe. Some of the authors seem to forget that. Your statements in this thread and in fact all others that I have read come across as an author who is also a reader. Some others do not. I especially liked the comment about thinking of the readers as dollars signs. It does seem that some here do. Again, my apologies for being unclear


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> But I don't see how insisting on competition relates to why you want people to raise their prices. Is it just that we've disturbed the picture you have how things should be? I'm sure that there are some people who have priced at $2.99 because of competition (but most of them probably price lower). There are people who believe only in win-lose.


The fact that there's competition is not why I believe prices should be higher. I think you hit the nail on the head with your second statement, though. I guess it disturbs me that authors are willing to sell all their hard work for "only" 2.99. It goes against what I believe artists should be able to get for their work. But as many here have pointed out, not everyone feels that way, which is just fine with me.



daringnovelist said:


> But I think the issue that you seem to be having the most trouble with is that so many here believe that it's either win-win, or it's lose-lose. We have come to the conclusion that cooperation (with readers and with other writers) to keep the price fair for all is the way we each individually prosper the most. It is a selfish and competitive thing. By doing this we beat those who don't cooperate and who price too high or low for the wrong reasons.


Fair enough. How big do you think the following here is of people who are on board with that idea. In other words, how effective are you all being in making it difficult for those "who don't cooperate"?


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> Of course I see the value in exchanging ideas about marketing and writing, and being a support group to help out in the bad times and celebrate the good. But when you have a good month selling your books, you don't cut a check for $3 and send it to a writer who had a bad month. At the end of the day, all books exist in a competitive marketplace, and there's no getting away from that.


Well, it's not - not in the way that you mean, though. Well, at least not if prices stay affordable. Sure, if prices are such that I can ONLY get one book, then it's competitive. But generally speaking, just because Victorine's Not What She Seems AND Maria's Little Miss Straight Lace. Avid readers read LOTS. If pricing is affordable, there's no reason that books have to necessarily compete with each other.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

So with all the people who advocate higher pricing, are you pricing your books higher? Or do you not have books out? 

I think competition will keep prices at $2.99 and lower, but there's nothing stopping any of you from raising your prices. As a reader, I am more demanding of books priced higher than $2.99. It does start to feel a bit like price-gouging to me when prices are higher. Granted, that's an emotional response to higher prices, and I can rationalize higher pricing, but I'm certainly going to exhaust the possibilities at $2.99 and lower before I get higher priced ebooks a hard look.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Arkali said:


> Well, it's not - not in the way that you mean, though. Well, at least not if prices stay affordable. Sure, if prices are such that I can ONLY get one book, then it's competitive. But generally speaking, just because Victorine's Not What She Seems AND Maria's Little Miss Straight Lace. Avid readers read LOTS. If pricing is affordable, there's no reason that books have to necessarily compete with each other.


Well, yes and no. I generally agree that if pricing is affordable people will buy more books, but plenty of people in this thread have said something to the effect of "I have a book budget." Even now, there is competition. If prices were all 99 cents, there'd be even less, so in theory people could buy more books. Yet someone we have settled on $2.99, since it's the minimum required to get the 70% royalty (for now).


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Mark Asher said:


> So with all the people who advocate higher pricing, are you pricing your books higher? Or do you not have books out?
> 
> I think competition will keep prices at $2.99 and lower, but there's nothing stopping any of you from raising your prices. As a reader, I am more demanding of books priced higher than $2.99. It does start to feel a bit like price-gouging to me when prices are higher. Granted, that's an emotional response to higher prices, and I can rationalize higher pricing, but I'm certainly going to exhaust the possibilities at $2.99 and lower before I get higher priced ebooks a hard look.


Personally, I don't have any books out. I hope to at some point. But I can tell you this: unless my feelings on this topic change drastically, I won't be pricing my books at $2.99, at least not to start. I will be willing to experiment and put my higher prices where my mouth is. I would try 4.99, because I think that's a fair price for an ebook. And, it's what I'd pay for someone else's ebook too, so I don't have to worry about charging readers more than I'm willing to pay myself.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> To all of those who read 100+ books a year... where do you find the time? That's 2 books a week. I see estimates of people reading 300 books a year - that's almost a book every day. Do you not have to work, or is your sole use of free time reading?


I read a book approximately every other day. When do I read?

* I read on my two coffee breaks at work.
* I read on my lunch break at work.
* I read after work sitting on my porch swing.
* I read during commercials if I happen to be watching TV (which is not often).
* I read while waiting on an appointment.
* I read at Sonic while I'm waiting on them to bring my food.
* I read at the grocery store while I'm waiting on the cashier to get to me.

Basically, any time I am not doing something else. Yes, most of my free time is spent reading. I don't watch that much TV (over 200 channels and they're all shite is NOT an exaggeration) and I'm not a horribly social person. I'm not shy or anything - it's just that being social wears me out.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Nick Fox said:


> The fact that there's competition is not why I believe prices should be higher. I think you hit the nail on the head with your second statement, though. I guess it disturbs me that authors are willing to sell all their hard work for "only" 2.99. It goes against what I believe artists should be able to get for their work. But as many here have pointed out, not everyone feels that way, which is just fine with me.


Let's put this _selling for only $2.99_ thing into perspective here. Do you know what the royalty rates are in the publishing business? If I were to sell my book via a traditional publishing house for $6.99, I would be getting less or almost the same as I would selling the book myself via Kindle.

Traditional publishers do not pay 70% royalties on their books. They fall in the 15% - 30% range depending on the publisher and the author's contract. Part of that money then goes to your agent and any marketing you have to do because a traditional publisher will not do everything for you. This is one reason why dead tree books are so expensive.

A current problem many authors have is that a publisher will offer the same royalty rates for ebooks as they do for dead tree books even though production costs are less for the publisher. Of course, a traditional publisher also markets your books and cuts you an advance on your royalties so those going the traditional route are not hurting but they are in some ways getting ripped off.

As for what an artist should get for their work, the answer is whatever people feel it is worth. You might think a masterpiece is worh thousands of dollars while the person next you you will say it's worth the box of crayons used to create it. There is a reason why very few artists make money and many are starving.



> Fair enough. How big do you think the following here is of people who are on board with that idea. In other words, how effective are you all being in making it difficult for those "who don't cooperate"?


We aren't making it difficult. The market is wide open and supports all levels of pricing. You can pick and choose your markt. The only thing people are pointing out (most of them avid readers which all authors should be if you follow Stephen King's advice) is how much they are willing to shell out for books and their reasons.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

kyrin said:


> Let's put this _selling for only $2.99_ thing into perspective here. Do you know what the royalty rates are in the publishing business? If I were to sell my book via a traditional publishing house for $6.99, I would be getting less or almost the same as I would selling the book myself via Kindle.
> 
> Traditional publishers do not pay 70% royalties on their books. They fall in the 15% - 30% range depending on the publisher and the author's contract. Part of that money then goes to your agent and any marketing you have to do because a traditional publisher will not do everything for you. This is one reason why dead tree books are so expensive.


I'm aware of this, and covered it in the very first post of this thread. The place where we differ is that I don't see "this is how it's always been" as a valid reason to keep going along with the status quo. However, some of the other reasons that have been listed here (getting more reviews, having a book-buying budget, targeting a certain niche in the market, not charging more than you'd want to pay yourself) are all very valid, and reasons I did not consider up front.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> I guess it disturbs me that authors are willing to sell all their hard work for "only" 2.99.


Again, an author doesn't make their money based on one sale of a book - it's (total sales of the book) x (money made for one book) = (money made)

If you're thinking someone is making $2.00 for all their hard work, you're looking at it wrong (no offense).


----------



## farrellclaire (Mar 5, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> Personally, I don't have any books out. I hope to at some point. But I can tell you this: unless my feelings on this topic change drastically, I won't be pricing my books at $2.99, at least not to start. I will be willing to experiment and put my higher prices where my mouth is. I would try 4.99, because I think that's a fair price for an ebook. And, it's what I'd pay for someone else's ebook too, so I don't have to worry about charging readers more than I'm willing to pay myself.


More power to you and good luck with that. For me, I can get an established writer's work for that price so there's no chance of me putting that into an unknown - particularly at the rate I get through books. I would probably pay that for a couple of indies here but that's only because I'm confident (based on their books under $3) I won't regret it.

A small percentage of people buy the most books - they are also the most likely to recommend books or be asked to recommend a book. If you don't value them then it's your loss.

And personally, charging $5 feels incredibly greedy - we've already lucked out here. IMHO we need to be earning our dues and proving ourselves, not getting precious about devaluing our work. The long term results are what's important. I'm suren not everyone agrees but it's how I feel as a writer and a consumer.


----------



## M.S. Verish (Feb 26, 2010)

No doubt this has been said and beaten into the ground, but pricing for an eBook depends entirely our one's name. We're still nobodies in the writing world, so we charge .99 cents. We just want to get noticed. We'll eventually move to the 2.99 norm, but not for awhile. We're willing to take a hit to obtain potential readers.

We just hope selling at .99 cents doesn't make us seem too amateur.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Nick Fox said:


> I'm aware of this, and covered it in the very first post of this thread. The place where we differ is that I don't see "this is how it's always been" as a valid reason to keep going along with the status quo. However, some of the other reasons that have been listed here (getting more reviews, having a book-buying budget, targeting a certain niche in the market, not charging more than you'd want to pay yourself) are all very valid, and reasons I did not consider up front.


You're missing the point. A lot of the higher priced books are traditionally published. Those writers are making less for their art than what an indie writer is making when selling at a lower price which is more palatable to the readers (and my conscience). I'm comfortable selling at a lower price and still making as much money as a mid or back list author from a traditional publishing company.

The place we differ has nothing to do with going along with the status quo. My position is charge whatever you feel is comfortable. Only you can determine what that price is. It seems that your driving concern has more to do with greed and the idea that you want to make as much money from your art as possible and worrying about how hard it will be to sell your art if people are comfortable selling their books for a lower price.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

farrellclaire said:


> More power to you and good luck with that. For me, I can get an established writer's work for that price so there's no chance of me putting that into an unknown - particularly at the rate I get through books. I would probably pay that for a couple of indies here but that's only because I'm confident (based on their books under $3) I won't regret it.
> 
> A small percentage of people buy the most books - they are also the most likely to recommend books or be asked to recommend a book. If you don't value them then it's your loss.


Thanks for your take on things. I think your point about a small percentage buying the most books is a good one. It's not that I don't value them, however. It's a question of how much value they put in an author's work that making their decision - not how much the author values the reader. I know that might sound a little chicken and egg - we're essentially saying the same thing from two different sides.



farrellclaire said:


> And personally, charging $5 feels incredibly greedy - we've already lucked out here. IMHO we need to be earning our dues and proving ourselves, not getting precious about devaluing our work. The long term results are what's important. I'm suren not everyone agrees but it's how I feel as a writer and a consumer.


Why does it feel greedy? Do you think it's because you're used to getting books for a certain price, or because you know how much authors get paid for a $2.99 book (that is, comparably to print).

Also, I don't see this new situation as "lucky," I see it as an opportunity. For so long writers have been at the mercy of the gatekeepers in publishing, but just because they're now gone it doesn't make us lucky. If you're getting beaten up by a bully every day at suddenly that bully moves away, I guess you could call it lucky. But that doesn't mean the bully beating you up everyday was okay in the first place.


----------



## farrellclaire (Mar 5, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> Why does it feel greedy? Do you think it's because you're used to getting books for a certain price, or because you know how much authors get paid for a $2.99 book (that is, comparably to print).
> 
> Also, I don't see this new situation as "lucky," I see it as an opportunity. For so long writers have been at the mercy of the gatekeepers in publishing, but just because they're now gone it doesn't make us lucky. If you're getting beaten up by a bully every day at suddenly that bully moves away, I guess you could call it lucky. But that doesn't mean the bully beating you up everyday was okay in the first place.


No, it feels greedy because it's an intangible object that I can't hand to someone else when I'm finished. There's no guarantees that it will be well-formatted. And - as indies, we're asking people to take a gamble on us. If they do then that's why we're lucky. Because they don't have to and (right or wrong) public perception is that we're not good enough to be traditionally published.

It's a new opportunity that's been made available to us at no cost. In a perfect world, we'd all have perfect editing, formatting and covers but as a whole, we don't. We're already taking advantage of this - we own our rights, we can keep selling indefinitely and there are people giving us a chance to prove the self publishing stigma wrong. We might earn $2 (on a $2.99 book) but our earning potential is limitless as is the reach of people we can get to.

I don't see how you can equate traditional publishing (if that's what you meant) with a bully beating you up. It's a business, it worked well for a long time. Things have changed not vanished. And we're making a choice, we're choosing this path, the gatekeepers haven't gone away - they've just changed. Now, the gatekeepers are readers and they are the ones who matter most.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

kyrin said:


> It seems that your driving concern has more to do with greed and the idea that you want to make as much money from your art as possible and worrying about how hard it will be to sell your art if people are comfortable selling their books for a lower price.


I don't understand this thinking. I've said repeatedly in this thread that I don't think authors should be gouging readers for as much as possible. I suggested a price of $4.99 instead of $2.99, for example. On the one hand, you say you believe people should charge whatever they feel comfortable, yet on the other hand, you say I'm greedy for wanting to charge more than $2.99. Well, which is it?

I don't think it's "greedy" to think about writing as a business. Sure, readers might not like to think of it that way, but if you're seriously writing, and making income out of it, it's a business. Any good business will try to get the highest amount that customers think is fair for its products. You don't see expensive items like plasma TVs being sold for cost - electronics companies make a profit, and no one runs around saying we should boycott Samsung or Sony.

Also, I ask you to keep in mind that this discussion is highly theoretical. I didn't come in here and post that gigantic first post and then say "If you agree, you'll have no problem buying my New Book, the first in a series, for $4.99!!!". I don't have a book to hawk. I'm interested in how people perceive ebooks, the value of them, and the current "accepted" price in the market.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

farrellclaire said:


> No, it feels greedy because it's an intangible object that I can't hand to someone else when I'm finished. There's no guarantees that it will be well-formatted. And - as indies, we're asking people to take a gamble on us. If they do then that's why we're lucky. Because they don't have to and (right or wrong) public perception is that we're not good enough to be traditionally published.
> 
> It's a new opportunity that's been made available to us at no cost. In a perfect world, we'd all have perfect editing, formatting and covers but as a whole, we don't. We're already taking advantage of this - we own our rights, we can keep selling indefinitely and there are people giving us a chance to prove the self publishing stigma wrong. We might earn $2 (on a $2.99 book) but our earning potential is limitless as is the reach of people we can get to.
> 
> I don't see how you can equate traditional publishing (if that's what you meant) with a bully beating you up. It's a business, it worked well for a long time. Things have changed not vanished. And we're making a choice, we're choosing this path, the gatekeepers haven't gone away - they've just changed. Now, the gatekeepers are readers and they are the ones who matter most.


Thank you for this post. You answered my question perfectly and gave me a lot to think about in the process. Especially the part about readers being the new gatekeepers.


----------



## RodGovers (Jun 7, 2010)

I posted earlier in this thread about how many indie books I've bought, and continue to buy, on impulse.

Now look at this thread on Amazon and see how many other Kindle owners also have a growing pile of to-be-read books because, like me, they are buying more ebooks than they ever did DTBs.

http://www.amazon.com/tag/kindle/forum/ref=cm_cd_tfp_ef_tft_tp?_encoding=UTF8&cdForum=Fx1D7SY3BVSESG&cdThread=Tx2G9TWL52XTXJA&displayType=tagsDetail

Like me too I bet most are not paying more than $2 to $4 for them.

Just saying ...

PS I actually now buy very few established authors on Kindle mainly because of the Agency agreement. When an ebook is priced at or near the hardcover/paperbook prices there's just no way I'll click the button. $12 or $13 for an old badly OCR'd backlist Penguin? You've got to be kidding.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Nick Fox said:


> Thanks for your take on things. I think your point about a small percentage buying the most books is a good one. It's not that I don't value them, however. It's a question of how much value they put in an author's work that making their decision - not how much the author values the reader. I know that might sound a little chicken and egg - we're essentially saying the same thing from two different sides.
> 
> Why does it feel greedy? Do you think it's because you're used to getting books for a certain price, or because you know how much authors get paid for a $2.99 book (that is, comparably to print).
> 
> Also, I don't see this new situation as "lucky," I see it as an opportunity. For so long writers have been at the mercy of the gatekeepers in publishing, but just because they're now gone it doesn't make us lucky. If you're getting beaten up by a bully every day at suddenly that bully moves away, I guess you could call it lucky. But that doesn't mean the bully beating you up everyday was okay in the first place.


Art is one of those things whose value will change from person to person based on their tastes. You might feel a piece of art is worth X amount while others might agree or disagree. Art is only worth what people are willing to pay for it, not how much you charge for it. If you charge a thousand dollars for a painting or sculpture and it never sells then the art is not worth anything monetarily. Art prices are totally driven by the consumer. Books and music are forms of art that you have some limited control over when it comes to pricing but at the end of the day, it is only worth what someone is willing and able to pay for it.

At $5.99, considering what I know about royalties and my own spending habits, I would say it's a little greedy but if that's what you think you can get for your writing as a new author then more power to you. It would have to better or on the same caliber as my favorite author who is offering his books at $5.99 and he is an established writer.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

> The fact that there's competition is not why I believe prices should be higher. I think you hit the nail on the head with your second statement, though. I guess it disturbs me that authors are willing to sell all their hard work for "only" 2.99. It goes against what I believe artists should be able to get for their work. But as many here have pointed out, not everyone feels that way, which is just fine with me.


Ah, but you are forgetting two things:

1. We are making the same or more as a traditionally published author even at the lower price. Was that cut fair to the authors? Quite possibly not, but many, many authors have been selling their hard work for 35 cents per mass market paperback for quite some time now. What you are suggesting is that they deserve more and we deserve more as well. That's a very nice idea. However, that brings us to point number 2:

2. We as authors, tv-makers and whatever-makers really don't get to sell our work at what we value it. It's a market place like any other. We price it at "What the Market Will Bear." This is a law of economics that stands pretty fast over time.

No one here is telling you not to price your work where you want it. Go ahead. No one here is telling you that you won't fit in here if you want to price it higher (there are a few authors who do price their work higher.)

What I am saying is this: The market will bear $2.99. I do not think the market for my type of book will bear $9.99 as readily (or perhaps not at all.) I price according to what is working for me. Many of us have tried different pricing. Many of us are still trying different pricing. We talk about it. WE ASK THE READERS (probably often enough that they'd like to smack us).

We listen. It's really that simple.


----------



## amanda_hocking (Apr 24, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> Personally, I don't have any books out. I hope to at some point. But I can tell you this: unless my feelings on this topic change drastically, I won't be pricing my books at $2.99, at least not to start. I will be willing to experiment and put my higher prices where my mouth is. I would try 4.99, because I think that's a fair price for an ebook. And, it's what I'd pay for someone else's ebook too, so I don't have to worry about charging readers more than I'm willing to pay myself.


I think this is an important point. Until you have a book out, this conversation is pretty hypothetical for you. I'm not saying that you won't do well at $4.99 or that you should price your book one way simply because a lot of us have priced our books that way. But until you actually get to see how readers and the market react to your book, I think it will be hard for you to truly understand the argument for 2.99.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

Nick Fox said:


> To all of those who read 100+ books a year... where do you find the time? That's 2 books a week. I see estimates of people reading 300 books a year - that's almost a book every day. Do you not have to work, or is your sole use of free time reading?


I am a mom with 3 teenagers, I am currently going to school full time to change careers into the Nursing field, and yes, if I am not on KB, my free time is spent reading. I carry my Kindle at ALL times, I read waiting anywhere, I read long books, short books, Not too keen on short stories unless they are in an anthology, I do read alot. I like reading, always have. I married someone who reads almost as much as I do. and 2 of our 3 kids are bookworms too. and it's not an estimate. we keeptrack of reading here on KB over in the book corner. after 1 year, I copied every month's lists to a single place (I had to create a website for my computer class) https://sites.google.com/site/oneyearofreading/home. You are free to go see what I read every month.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> Fair enough. How big do you think the following here is of people who are on board with that idea. In other words, how effective are you all being in making it difficult for those "who don't cooperate"?


We don't care. We're not out to beat them. Since you seem to be so locked into this win-lose paradigm, I was just pointing out that that's a mindset that is guaranteed to lose.

I agree with Arkali - you do seem to be more interested in theory, but we're talking about practice. Theory is nice only so far as it has a practical application. (Or as Yogi Berra said "In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice they're not.")

Camille


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

I have never seen any authors here tell anyone NOT to set their own price at whatever they want. If someone asks, they do give personal advice on what they have experienced to be effective. There are a couple of indies around who do set their books at the $8. price, and they are happy with the return, even though they have fewer sales. No one that I have seen in over 2 years of being a member here has ever told them "you cannot sell at that price or we will do somethign against you."


----------



## 13893 (Apr 29, 2010)

The main idea is to tell stories on the one hand, and to read stories on the other. Price is important as far as making it possible to keep telling or reading stories.

It's early days as far as indie publishing goes, and best practices will shake out eventually. I suspect that the 2.99 - 4.99 price level is what will actually support ongoing careers with the 99 cent level being useful for sales and introductory items.

But I could be wrong!


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

There is a price for each author that becomes their "sweet" spot.  Where they make the most royalties.  If you sell one book a day at $4.99, but only sell one book a day when you lower it to $2.99, then raise it back to $4.99.

Each person will have to play around with price to find their own sweet spot.  Mine happens to be at 99 cents right now.  That might change in the future, but for now I'm happy.  Find your own sweet spot when it's time to publish, and you'll be happy too.  

Vicki


----------



## Jnassise (Mar 22, 2010)

> Traditional publishers do not pay 70% royalties on their books. They fall in the 15% - 30% range depending on the publisher and the author's contra


Ah, no. That's not correct. You don't get into the 15% range until you've sold over 10,000 copies usually and 30% is unheard of. And that's for hardcover ONLY.

Here's a typical breakdown.

(1)	Hardcover: 10% to 5,000 copies; 12.5% from 5,001 to 10,000 copies; and 15% thereafter
(2)	Trade-paperback: 7.5%
(3)	Mass market paperback: 8% to 150,000 copies; 10% thereafter
(4)	Large-print hardcover: 10%
(5)	Large-print paperback: 7.5


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

Jnassise said:


> Ah, no. That's not correct. You don't get into the 15% range until you've sold over 10,000 copies usually and 30% is unheard of. And that's for hardcover ONLY.
> 
> Here's a typical breakdown.
> 
> ...


That's pathetic especially given the shelf life of most paper books.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

Jnassise said:


> Ah, no. That's not correct. You don't get into the 15% range until you've sold over 10,000 copies usually and 30% is unheard of. And that's for hardcover ONLY.
> 
> Here's a typical breakdown.
> 
> ...


He might have meant ebooks. I think that 15 to ... well maybe 25 percent has been mentioned for ebook royalties for traditional authors.


----------



## 13893 (Apr 29, 2010)

Carina pays 15 percent of ebooks, more if people buy at the Carina website.


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

MariaESchneider said:


> He might have meant ebooks. I think that 15 to ... well maybe 25 percent has been mentioned for ebook royalties for traditional authors.


I wonder if Evanovich ever got that $50M advance she wanted for four Stephanie Plum books.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Philip Chen said:


> Well, my price increase to $3.99 is now live. So, if anyone buys only on price, please do not consider _Falling Star_. If, on the other hand, you are interested in reading a plausible explanation as to why:
> 
> 1. The White House's science adviser just issued a memorandum about asteroids crashing into the Earth and how we must prepare for this apocalyptic event,
> 2. The United Nations recently opened an Office of Outer Space Affairs,
> ...


That's a very nice shameless plug. I wonder if it would be cool if all of us derailed the thread with our book info and why we sell it for whatever price.



MariaESchneider said:


> He might have meant ebooks. I think that 15 to ... well maybe 25 percent has been mentioned for ebook royalties for traditional authors.


For the most part, I was talking about ebooks royalties but I wanted to illustrate the upper range of royalties as a comparison to show how goodd Amazon's royalty plan is in comparrison even when you sell at a lower price.


----------



## Jnassise (Mar 22, 2010)

Okay ebooks - standard is 25% OF NET, not of cover price.  Almost all of the big six have adopted this structure at this point.

-Joe


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

Joesph, thank you for giving us some of the "Big 6" picture.. it's nice to have someone who has been there entering in information to make us all more knowledgeable.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

BTackitt said:


> Joesph, thank you for giving us some of the "Big 6" picture.. it's nice to have someone who has been there entering in information to make us all more knowledgeable.


I agree, thank you.


----------



## Jnassise (Mar 22, 2010)

Anytime -happy to do so.

-J


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"1.) A fish is a fish for the most part. While people are enamored of a particular kind of fish, you don't see many end customers searching through the tuna cans at the supermarket for the fish caught by their favorite fisherman. "_

First, no econ model is an exact match for real life. The models highlight various factors that we should consider in dealing with real situations.

The lesson from the fishery deals with unrestrained entry into the market for producers. When fishermen are free to simply sail out and catch fish in a given fishery (cod, herring, salmon, halibut, etc) experience shows that the number of fishermen increases until price falls to average cost of fishermen. This results in a very unprofitable exercise fir the fishermen.
However, experience also shows that when there are barriers to entry into the fishery for fishermen, price rises above average cost and approaches marginal cost. This is done by granting permits, limiting seasons, etc. It reduces the supply, and increases the price.
The similarity to the electronic book market is that we now have no barriers to authors (fishermen) entering the market. So, in contemplating the situation, one might want to consider the fishery model. that doesn't mean they are exact matches, just that there are sufficient similarities to ask a few questions.
Let's do a thought experiment. Suppose the government issued a permit to market a book. And let's say they issue 1,000 permits to market novels per year. Those permits are issued on some basis that only the government can dream up. So, there would only be 1,000 novels entering the market this year. Would prices stay at $2.99? This is much like limiting the catch ina fishery.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

The reason I put in my "shameless plug" is that we are not selling a commodity, but are selling individually produced works that can be differentiated in the market. Commodity pricing is only appropriate if all the ebooks written are fungible, i.e. Indistinguihable from one another. In a way the market will make that differentiation, not us. That is why I raised my price a buck: to see if what all of you are saying (not all but certainly some) is true. I'll report back if there is less or more sales from this experiment.


----------



## 13893 (Apr 29, 2010)

Of course the courts might change everything for authors with publishers not themselves.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"1.) A fish is a fish for the most part. While people are enamored of a particular kind of fish, you don't see many end customers searching through the tuna cans at the supermarket for the fish caught by their favorite fisherman. "_
> 
> First, no econ model is an exact match for real life. The models highlight various factors that we should consider in dealing with real situations.
> 
> ...


The thing is, Terrence, that there has not been a barrier to enter this market in years. We have some powerful new tools that level the playing field a bit in terms of getting attention, but it's not even in striking distance of the same paradigm. It has never been hard to publish (especially since the advent of personal computers). It has only been hard to find customers.

But that's moot, because you're talking about price - whether there is a barrier or not to entry, the results you talk about happened a long time ago.

The bottom price for books has always been FREE. From the start. You could always get access to good books for free, and there has not been a barrier for finding these books in over a century. Libraries, trading, discards and used, has always been a well established part of the book market. That has never been so for fishing or manufacturing. Furthermore the ebook market was originally established by free books, and stayed that way for many years. (For instance, the Gutenberg Project has been out there for longer than any commercial effort in ebooks.)

It works like the fine art market - where there has never been any barrier but snobbery. (I don't mean snobbery in a bad way, it just seems to be the best word for what I mean.) The customer has always been able to get the product for free if they want it, and many do. There has always been significantly more people doing it than can make a living at it. And yet you get prices ranging from free, to a couple of bucks to hundreds of thousands of dollars.

It's a different paradigm.

Camille


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Philip Chen said:


> The reason I put in my "shameless plug" is that we are not selling a commodity, but are selling individually produced works that can be differentiated in the market. Commodity pricing is only appropriate if all the ebooks written are fungible, i.e. Indistinguihable from one another. In a way the market will make that differentiation, not us. That is why I raised my price a buck: to see if what all of you are saying (not all but certainly some) is true. I'll report back if there is less or more sales from this experiment.


The point is good, but it's against the forum rules. Just FYI.

Camille


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"1.) A fish is a fish for the most part. While people are enamored of a particular kind of fish, you don't see many end customers searching through the tuna cans at the supermarket for the fish caught by their favorite fisherman. "_
> 
> First, no econ model is an exact match for real life. The models highlight various factors that we should consider in dealing with real situations.
> 
> ...


You may not need a permit to write and publish a book but there are some very real barriers. These include:
1) Quality - no one wants to buy a low quality product. Everything has to spot on from cover art to writing to formatting.
2) Pricing - authors will price themselves out of business because they are trying to sell their book for too much money either to cover their costs or because they think a reader should pay top dollar for their book.
3) Time - Writing a book takes time. I would love to have their novels be their sole source of income but that's not the case right now. Many author's starting out will have to balance their job and home life with writing.
4) Expenses - There are a number of expenses especially if you're hiring an editor/proofreader and commissioning cover art. You also have little things like printer ink and paper. Prices increase if you use a print on demand service so you can have your book in dead tree form. There is also marketing to consider.
5) Misc Stuff that gets in the way of writing and publishing a book


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Camile, you are wise in the ways of the force.

I agree with the whole fine art example.


----------



## Paul Clayton (Sep 12, 2009)

I have to agree with the vast majority who believe 2.99 to be the price point.  This price has already been established.  This seems to be what Kindle owners expect of 'Indie' books.  And I've only heard megasellers bandied about as having books that folks would pay 9.99 for.  Publishers will be relagating their new, just out of the gate, writers to the 100K heights if they price their ebooks at 9.99.  But that will probably happen until they get the message.  As I've said before, this is a 'window' of sorts for Indies.  I wonder how long it will last.  Deals get made and the little people get the fingers stepped on.  Let's all hope it lasts for years and make hay while the Amazon sun shines on high.  Best!


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Daringnovelist,

I wouldn't agree there have been no barriers for many years. Were that the case, anyone could have their book on the shelves of Barnes & Noble or Borders. We can say anyone could have had a book printed, but the barrier is getting into the distribution channel.  Agents and publishers were the gatekeepers, and I'd suggest that Amazon's Kindle store has changed that considerably. This is easy to test. How many Kindle authors here have hard copioes of their books on the shelves of the major retailers? If not, why not? Personal choice, or have you encountered some barrier?


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Daringnovelist,
> 
> I wouldn't agree there have been no barriers for many years. Were that the case, anyone could have their book on the shelves of Barnes & Noble or Borders. We can say anyone could have had a book printed, but the barrier is getting into the distribution channel. Agents and publishers were the gatekeepers, and I'd suggest that Amazon's Kindle store has changed that considerably. This is easy to test. How many Kindle authors here have hard copioes of their books on the shelves of the major retailers? If not, why not? Personal choice, or have you encountered some barrier?


You missed my point - whether there is a barrier or not, the price of books, and especially ebooks, are essentially at zero already. Most books go through multiple hands. I think I read a statistic that said there are more readings of books for free than paid - because of libraries, sharing, and especially free ebooks.

The base price for ebooks is already established at Free.

And who needs physical books on shelves? Yes, things have changed, but it has always been easy to get books out there - especially if you want to give it out for free (which was your point - that when there are people out there giving away books for free, the world will end - well that happened a long time ago, and the world hasn't ended). We reached saturation a long time ago. I'm not trying to be snobbish when I say that books aren't a commodity. They aren't. They're actually a strange hybrid between artisanal product and intellectual property.

Further more, if you think about it, the conditions you describe happened a long time ago within publshing. If you go with the fishing metaphore - our customers are publishers. There is an unlimited supply of authors offering our products to publishers. And yes there are many who would leap at the chance for any terms on the contract. Publishers could easily get books for free and buy them for "work for hire" rights too. There are plenty of people who would sign such a contract.

And yet we still have multimillion dollar book deals. Why? Because people don't want just any old book. It's not commodity. That kind of competition has little effect on the market.

Camille


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Kyrin,

    Sure, we can say there are multiple barriers to entry into a market. For example, a lack of a few billion dollars is a barrier to my entry into the oil refining market. Lack of training is a barrier to my enetering the market as a cardiologist. 
    But, when I say there are no entry barriers now, I am speaking of an author who has a product, much like a cardiologist who has completed his residency or a company that owns a refinery.  In the recent past this author sent a bunch of letters to agents and publishers. He can still do that, but he can also reach the market by uploading to Amazon Kindle. That's new. That's different. That allows access to a huge market that was not available before. He can access that market with a high or low quality book. He can access it with a book priced at one cent or $19. He might spend money promoting it, or he might do no promotion.
    The quality, pricing, and expenses you mention might determine if one is a success in the market, but that happens after one is in the market.

Aside:
    Has anyone noticed that while each book is unique, hard copy books were priced like fungible goods? The hard covers all seemed to be priced right at the same point whether it was Stephen King or a first timer.  paperbacks followed the same pattern. Same with movies. The theaters charge the same to see a $200 million production as they do to see a $500,000 production.
    That's what the public has come to expect. They don't expect books or movies to be priced as individual works, but as fungible goods. Maybe it's right. Maybe it's wrong. Maybe it's dumb.  But that's how it is. It makes me wonder if it's reasonable to expect eBooks to be treated any differently.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"(which was your point - that when there are people out there giving away books for free, the world will end - well that happened a long time ago, and the world hasn't ended). "_

OK. I am failing to accurately and cogently make my point. That happens. Time to retire from the field.


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

farrellclaire said:


> No, it feels greedy because it's an intangible object that I can't hand to someone else when I'm finished. There's no guarantees that it will be well-formatted. And - as indies, we're asking people to take a gamble on us. If they do then that's why we're lucky. Because they don't have to and (right or wrong) public perception is that we're not good enough to be traditionally published.


All books are, by definition, intangibles. As are movies, music and so on. What is changing is not what the book buying public is buying, but the medium through which it is delivered. With most retailers offering substantial sample downloads, the public has just as much of a chance to check on writing quality, editorial standards, and formatting as with a physical book.

I don't think it is fair to say that lower price points are justified by non-aligned writers simply because they are non-aligned. From all accounts, the average aligned authors receive $2 or so for each paperback sale. I don't see why an independent author should get any less. On the other hand, he or she would need to justify to the book buying public why they deserves more.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Kyrin,
> 
> Sure, we can say there are multiple barriers to entry into a market. For example, a lack of a few billion dollars is a barrier to my entry into the oil refining market. Lack of training is a barrier to my enetering the market as a cardiologist.
> But, when I say there are no entry barriers now, I am speaking of an author who has a product, much like a cardiologist who has completed his residency or a company that owns a refinery. In the recent past this author sent a bunch of letters to agents and publishers. He can still do that, but he can also reach the market by uploading to Amazon Kindle. That's new. That's different. That allows access to a huge market that was not available before. He can access that market with a high or low quality book. He can access it with a book priced at one cent or $19. He might spend money promoting it, or he might do no promotion.
> ...


Amazon Kindle might be new but ePublishing and eBooks aren't that new. When PDAs were first introduced in the early 90s, you could publish books for the Palm, Sony and other handheld devices. It wasn't as widespread as the Kindle and the other eReaders we have today but they existed. There were no barriers to getting published on the devices. Palm Digital Media made it easy to publish books for their devices as long as you owned the rights.

As for entering the writing market, if everyone could sit down, write a book, edit it and sell it then there would be a lot more writers in the world. It takes commitment and perseverance to enter the market whether you try to do it the indie way or traditionally. If you're going to do it the traditional way, you also need patience, talent and/or a niche market.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Aside:
> Has anyone noticed that while each book is unique, hard copy books were priced like fungible goods? The hard covers all seemed to be priced right at the same point whether it was Stephen King or a first timer. paperbacks followed the same pattern. Same with movies. The theaters charge the same to see a $200 million production as they do to see a $500,000 production.
> That's what the public has come to expect. They don't expect books or movies to be priced as individual works, but as fungible goods. Maybe it's right. Maybe it's wrong. Maybe it's dumb. But that's how it is. It makes me wonder if it's reasonable to expect eBooks to be treated any differently.


Uh, no they are not priced the same. You're cherry picking your markets. Full price hardback is a minority portion of the market - and even there full price varies a LOT (from like $12 to $40). Even the very same BOOK is always and easily available at multiple price points, including free.

I never have to pay those huge prices for movies either. And I don't wait for second run. That's not how marketing works any more. As a matter of fact, even with commodities (such as small appliances and clothes) nearly every manufacturer finds ways of creating multiple price points for identical products. Have you ever noticed that you can't buy an unadorned plain lamp any more? Not without paying excessive amounts of money. A cheap lamp will come with tacky doodads on it to help differentiate the price points and push the consumer upscale. The manufacturer wins by covering all price points, by encouraging the customer to pay as high as he or she can afford.

Retail has been adapting to the long tail world for a long time now. Customers are not used to paying a particular price on anything - they are used to paying slightly more than they want to pay. And no matter what your budget is, the product is there for you.

And that kind of marketing works really well.



> OK. I am failing to accurately and cogently make my point. That happens. Time to retire from the field.


Obviously you aren't the only one.

Camille


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

When I first thought to release my novel as an eBook, I was told by a person active in eCommerce and social networks that $2.99 was a barrier if I hoped to sell any copies of my book (i.e., no higher than). I blindly followed that advice. As I get more active in this field, I am persuaded that several things may be at work:

1. An expectation by readers of independent authors that eBooks cannot be worth more than $2.99, or for that matter should be free. (not unlike what happened with music sharing operations like Napster.
2. Herd mentality by authors who so desperately want to be heard (I do not blame anyone for that; as I share the sentiment) that they would give it away free with the hope that recognition will follow. This is what I called the lemming effect, when I was in the banking business. 
3. A general feeling that eBooks are fungible and that readers do not discriminate as to what they wiil read (if even within a genre).

With respect to the first point, I firmly believe that people who read truly good books will not be so persuaded. If you will that is the target audience that I would like to have read my book. I did not write my book to be pulp fiction. Having said that, I also recognize that I am not going to put an eBook out there for $100.00, if only for the simple matter that Amazon limits the 70% royalty to only books more than $2.99 and less than $9.99. We should let the free market decide within that bracket which books will sell and which won't; readers presumably taking into account the story, the writing ability of the author, how engaging the book is, the book cover etc. There will always be a "napster" element on the web, even in eBooks (witness the piracy sites already at work); I'm not sure that that is the sector that I would like to share my work.

With respect to the second point, I do not consider myself a lemming, as I suspect none of you do. So why are we all responding like one? In all of my careers, I was a market maker or proponent of new ideas (some successful; some not). This is the reason that I never thought about vanity publishing my book in the almost twenty years that I trudged from on agent or publisher to another. If there is no interest in this book, why should I pay to have someone read it. Having said that eBooks are in a way vanity publishing, but with a lower entry threshold and a feeling that you are actually doing something proactive and not just paying to see your words in print.

As to my last point, our books are not fungible, they are unique. Fungible things are like gasoline, milk, groceries, electricity, etc., that can be just as easily be purchased from one party or another. Even then, witness the advent of "green" energy which is still more expensive than coal generated energy and the efforts of its marketeers to differentiate it in order to justify their higher price. This conversation has been useful, but we should be spending our time not justifying a "price point." How I hate HGTV and how they have made real estate transactions fungible. We should get back to doing what attracted me to Kindle Boards in the first place and what keeps me coming back: helping each other in the process of writing, and marketing our books.

To those who were offended that I posted about my book, I apologize. I would hope that those who know me understand that I did not do it just for "shameless" publicity, but to make a point. I will not be fungicized*TM*.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Philip Chen said:


> When I first thought to release my novel as an eBook, I was told by a person active in eCommerce and social networks that $2.99 was a barrier if I hoped to sell any copies of my book (i.e., no higher than). I blindly followed that advice. As I get more active in this field, I am persuaded that several things may be at work:
> 
> 1. An expectation by readers of independent authors that eBooks cannot be worth more than $2.99, or for that matter should be free. (not unlike what happened with music sharing operations like Napster.
> 2. Herd mentality by authors who so desperately want to be heard (I do not blame anyone for that; as I share the sentiment) that they would give it away free with the hope that recognition will follow. This is what I called the lemming effect, when I was in the banking business.
> ...


1) As for reader expectations, those vary from person to person. It's the same thing with any product, a consumer's expectations will differ. One person might be willing to shell out $15 to see an Adam Sandler movie, someone else wouldn't even see the movie at a matinee showing or for free. It's not that readers expect an independent author to be $2.99. It's the fact that they are unwilling to pay more than a certain amount for any author they do not know unless they come highly reccommended.

2) Perhaps, you need to phrase this a little better or differently. I think it has been stated repeatedly and by multiple people that people are free to charge whatever price they wish for their books. No one has said that you must charge a certain price. People have stated their own experiences at certain prices and how it influenced their decision.

Some of us have experimented with different pricing to find what price works best for us. I priced my first book at $5.99 and it didn't sell. I thought long and hard about it and realized that as a reader I wouldn't buy an ebook for $5.99 or more unless it was an author I was already familiar with and liked. I then experimented with several prices. In the end, I got the best results at the $2.99 price. I didn't sell as many copies as I did at 99 cents but the difference was not that great. I also made more from sales. Maybe I might up my prices one day but that depends on the market and my comfort level. I think everyone here is flexible when it comes to pricing their books.

3) I don't know where you are getting this from. No one has stated that readers do not discriminate as to what and who they will read. People have been stating that most readers are very discriminating. Some will only read certain genre and authors. Others might not read any book over a certain amount.

EDIT: A little clarification. I am not saying $2.99 works best for everyone. What works best for my book might not work for someone else. Only you can determine what price is the best one to sell your books at.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

Kyrin,

Actually you and I are in agreement.  My second point is not so much that someone told me I couldn't price it higher than $2.99, but my blindly following the "conventional wisdom" that I shouldn't price it higher than $2.99 because that was where everyone had set a "price point.".  I believe that as you found out with your first book that $5.99 didn't work because it attracted few if any buyers, market forces will dictate an appropriate selling price.  My point being is that we should not blindly follow the crowd (like lemmings, who incidentally do not do what they are commonly thought to do), but should make a judgment based on our own assessment of an appropriate price.

I personally regret that I didn't do that for my book, as I believe that it automatically put me into a category that I didn't want it to be.  It is not a book for someone who wants to pick up from the rack because it is cheap, but is a book that I hope they pick up because they read the reviews and understand that there might be insights garnered from reading it.  that said, I am doing a lousy job of getting that across.

Phil


----------



## theaatkinson (Sep 22, 2010)

BTackitt said:


> BTW, thinking Kindle owners don't KNOW that authors who price above $2.99 get 70% of the royalties is about equal to thinking Kindle owners have no clue. Amazon has pushed that pricing platform all over the place in announcements, press releases, etc. One could never have talked with authors and know that bit of information. So we too can do math.
> 
> Also, If I am trying out a new author, and I see that they have 3 books in a series, if the prices are $2.99 or less, I am very likely to buy all 3 at the same time without having read book 1. (btw this happens ALOT with me, ergo my large TBR which I plow through fairly rapidly.) If the books are priced $4.99 and above, I will only buy 1 of those 3 books, and I will mentally be less forgiving of ANY errors in the book. Guess which author has more $ in their pocket now? It's not the second one. and later when each publishes a new book, guess which one I will probably spend $ on?


You say you are a reader, but damn, you write eloquently.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

theapatra said:


> You say you are a reader, but d*mn, you write eloquently.


ditto that


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)




----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

LKRigel said:


> Of course the courts might change everything for authors with publishers not themselves.


I don't really follow what's going in there. To me, it sounds like a lot of semantics, and it only applies if you're publishing your ebook with a traditional publisher. Anything big I'm missing?

Also, it is always possible that Amazon could change their royalty structure in the future once they've gained enough market share. I'd say it's even "very likely."


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> And yet we still have multimillion dollar book deals. Why? Because people don't want just any old book. It's not commodity. That kind of competition has little effect on the market.
> 
> Camille


In your example above, the books are not the commodity, the author is. And since the author therefore produces the books, the author is producing a commodity.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

@Nick,

You lost me on that one.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Has anyone noticed that while each book is unique, hard copy books were priced like fungible goods? The hard covers all seemed to be priced right at the same point whether it was Stephen King or a first timer. paperbacks followed the same pattern. Same with movies. The theaters charge the same to see a $200 million production as they do to see a $500,000 production.
> That's what the public has come to expect. They don't expect books or movies to be priced as individual works, but as fungible goods. Maybe it's right. Maybe it's wrong. Maybe it's dumb. But that's how it is. It makes me wonder if it's reasonable to expect eBooks to be treated any differently.


Thank you for explaining better one of the first points I was trying to make in this thread. When you pick up a hardback in a bookstore, no matter who wrote it, the price is the same. The costs to produce them are the same, and the price is independent of whether that author got a $25,000 advance or a $250,000 advance. It's part of my original thinking about why indies should not be priced so differently. OR it's another way of saying "Hey publishers, lower your prices for ebooks!" At some point, the market is going to equalize.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> In your example above, the books are not the commodity, the author is. And since the author therefore produces the books, the author is producing a commodity.


BINGO!

You finally got it.

Camille


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> Thank you for explaining better one of the first points I was trying to make in this thread. When you pick up a hardback in a bookstore, no matter who wrote it, the price is the same. The costs to produce them are the same, and the price is independent of whether that author got a $25,000 advance or a $250,000 advance. It's part of my original thinking about why indies should not be priced so differently. OR it's another way of saying "Hey publishers, lower your prices for ebooks!" At some point, the market is going to equalize.


But where on earth do you get this idea that hardbacks are always priced the same? The price is all over the place. I see them as low a $12, or as high as $40, and then there are widely ranging discounts.

Camille


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> But where on earth do you get this idea that hardbacks are always priced the same? The price is all over the place. I see them as low a $12, or as high as $40, and then there are widely ranging discounts.
> 
> Camille


I'm just talking general price on your average hardback. I'm not talking about specialty books that cost $40 or remaindered books that you can get for $5 or $10. It's been a little while since I've been in a brick and mortar bookstore, but I've never seen a regular hardback selling for $40 or for $12.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

Nick Fox said:


> I'm just talking general price on your average hardback. I'm not talking about specialty books that cost $40 or remaindered books that you can get for $5 or $10. It's been a little while since I've been in a brick and mortar bookstore, but I've never seen a regular hardback selling for $40 or for $12.


They really do vary these days. I think the list price of King's latest was 29 or 35. No one was selling it for that except maybe a few independent shops. Publishers have been playing around with hardback prices--anywhere from 22.95 to about 34.99. The bookstores then offer some discounts and if you go to Walmart, you'll find a different discount. The average hardback is still around 24.99 but I think the point is everyone knows you can shop around and find a discount. If you pre-order from some places, you automatically get a discount.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_ "I'm just talking general price on your average hardback. I'm not talking about specialty books that cost $40 or remaindered books that you can get for $5 or $10. It's been a little while since I've been in a brick and mortar bookstore, but I've never seen a regular hardback selling for $40 or for $12."_
This is where expectations come in. It seems this phenomenon operates when one is selling content. It operates with books and movies, and I think most music is similarly priced. 
Doesn't Apple iTunes sell everything for the same price regardless of who the artist is? So, big time rock bands and the local garage band both sell at 99 cents. Audio books seem priced by length and when published rather than by author or quality. Ten hour audio books published in 2005 cluster around the same price.
How about art reproductions? I don't know that market. Do posters of the Mona Lisa sell for the same as a poster of an unknown? It's interesting that artists who make prints actually stamp the individual print number on each print. They also stamp the total number of prints in the run and destroy the stone after production. That defines their scarcity.
I'm not sure if anyone has done any work in this field. I'll take a look. (One thing I do know is my comments, criticisms, and great thoughts will have absolutely zero effect on the market.)


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> Thank you for explaining better one of the first points I was trying to make in this thread. When you pick up a hardback in a bookstore, no matter who wrote it, the price is the same. The costs to produce them are the same, and the price is independent of whether that author got a $25,000 advance or a $250,000 advance. It's part of my original thinking about why indies should not be priced so differently. OR it's another way of saying "Hey publishers, lower your prices for ebooks!" At some point, the market is going to equalize.


I think prices are going to come down, at some point, on eBooks from trad. publishers. We'll see. Yes, publishers are charging $9.99 - $12.99 for new releases, but consumers aren't happy about that.

As for the first part - this goes back to my to my original point that the money made on books has less to do with the price per copy and more to do with the number sold.


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

Arkali said:


> I think prices are going to come down, at some point, on eBooks from trad. publishers. We'll see. Yes, publishers are charging $9.99 - $12.99 for new releases, but consumers aren't happy about that.


From our standpoint, yes we're not happy about those outrageous prices and won't pay them. I've watched a couple of new, overpriced releases, and they climb right up the rankings ladder. The buying public is not as unhappy as we think. What happens is what Nick said. They'll just buy fewer books or maybe they'll cut down on something else, but if they want the book, they'll buy it.



> As for the first part - this goes back to my to my original point that the money made on books has less to do with the price per copy and more to do with the number sold.


Yes, and the number sold can have a lot to do with how many books you have in your catalog as well as how many positive reviews.

As I said before, in the US where I'm beginning to build a name, my $2.99 books outsell my .99 books at about 5:1. In the UK where I'm just getting started, the .99 books outsell the $2.99 books about 5:1.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Nick Fox said:


> I don't really follow what's going in there. To me, it sounds like a lot of semantics, and it only applies if you're publishing your ebook with a traditional publisher. Anything big I'm missing?
> 
> Also, it is always possible that Amazon could change their royalty structure in the future once they've gained enough market share. I'd say it's even "very likely."


Currently, eBooks are considered sales like a normal book or record you would buy in a store. Authors are paid 25% royalties from traditional publishing houses for sales. If eBooks are considered liscences (ie like software for your computer and music), those publishers would have to pay much higher royalties.

A sale is a lot different from aquiring a license to use a product. I can't tell you all the differences because I'm not a lawyer and my knowledge of copyright law is limited. I think a license gives the owner of that license more control and protection than he or she has with a simple sale. Take a look at any license agreement to see what I mean. Most outline what can and cannot be done with a license.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

I was thinking a little more on this, and I think the real problem with this discussion of the "barrier to entry" is that just because it's hard to break in to traditional, doesn't mean that's the actual barrier. It's an artificial one due to the problems with physical distribution.

The actual barrier to entry on fiction is, and always was, that not everybody is Stephen King.

And that's not going to change. As a matter of fact, with self-publishing being so easy, we will have more people who shoot themselves in the foot by not editing, and thereby making the readability barrier higher, not lower.

The thing I think nobody is actually addressing directly in this overall discussion is that money isn't the biggest thing readers spend on us. They may be stingy or generous with money - but the thing they really worry about wasting is their _TIME_. Several lost hours of your life is not something you spend lightly - even if you do read 300 books a year.

In performance and branding models, the product itself is not what is being bought. The product is a souvenir, a sample, a memory. As they say in the game industry, "the first rock of crack is free." And one successful model has been a continuous supply of free stuff to keep customers hooked, and the income flow comes from merchandising or advertising, or events or other more lucrative spin offs.

Camille


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

If anyone is interested in barriers to entry theory an important aspect is called the Tragedy of the Commons. (Someone wrote a book with a title like that, but I forget who.) This essentially holds that a lack of property rights leads individuals to make rational decisions which, in aggregate, destroy or degrade the common resource. This degradation is measured against similar resources in which property rights exist. Property rights in this sense refer to a right to use the resource.
    There are lots of examples. One I worked on dealt with grazing on the Navajo reservation in New Mexico.  Tha Navajos let any Navajo graze their sheep on the pastures commonly owned by the Navajo nation on the reservation. So, that's what they did. Individuals grazed their sheep on the commons with no restriction on how many sheep or how many ranchers could do so.
    When the health of these pastures was compared to similar pastures owned by individuals, they were found to be less viable. The difference was that the individual owners of pastures controlled the number of sheep and the periods during which they could graze.
    That's one example of the commons. Fisheries, which I mentioned earlier, are another. There are lots of examples.
    So what does that have to do with book pricing? There are certainly many differences between Navajo pastures and the book market, and I concede them before anyone highlights them. The similarity is between the ability to enter the commons. The commons here is the eBook market. It's an interesting analysis. I imagine someone will write a book on it one of these days. Hmmm...


----------



## G.Hugh (Sep 24, 2009)

I too agree with Amanda. I have not nor will I pay more than $2.99 for an e-book and I find absolutely fantastic reads at $2.99 and (unfortunately) below.

Early on my e-book editions were priced first at $9.99 later at $5.99 ... little action!

My books are now priced at $2.99 for Kindle and e-pub (B&N) and $16 for Trade Paperback (B&N and Amazon periodically run discounted offers). I fortunately have sales in all three formats nationally and in Kindle & Trade Paperback globally.

Now the kicker...Kindle and e-pub outsell Trade Paperback 5 to 1 and volumes are 20 times those experienced at $5.99 and 'infinitely' greater that the volume at $9.99.

Is it the price? I am not sure, but when book three of the collection comes out at the end of Spring 2011, the pricing will be the same as books 1 & 2.

So, when we published my wife's motivational book 'Look For The Hook' www.lookforthehook.com we priced the e-book editions at $2.99 and the Trade Paperback at $12 (it is 170 pages vs 300 + for my mysteries). Same results statistically as my mysteries.

My attitude on the $2.99 is it seems to work so I won't experiment any further.

Those are my reasons for selling at $2.99

G. Hugh Bodell
Author - The Treachery In Turtle Bay Collection
www.treachery.us


----------



## 13893 (Apr 29, 2010)

Well, if we're going all anecdotal:

This week I paid 

6.29 for A Game of Thrones
8.54 for Cold Comfort Farm

and a few weeks ago I paid 9.99 for The Iron Duke.

Those numbers were irrelevant to me. I bought the books because I wanted to read them; the prices could have been interchanged and I would have still bought all three.

Second situation: There are a lot of free classics available for Kindle. I rarely get them. I paid more for decent and well-footnoted editions of Middlemarch, Peter Pan, and Frankenstein.  This gets to the time issue -- I don't want to waste my time on a badly formatted book.

Ultimately, the better the book, the higher the seller can charge and still find buyers.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> If anyone is interested in barriers to entry theory an important aspect is called the Tragedy of the Commons. (Someone wrote a book with a title like that, but I forget who.) This essentially holds that a lack of property rights leads individuals to make rational decisions which, in aggregate, destroy or degrade the common resource. This degradation is measured against similar resources in which property rights exist. Property rights in this sense refer to a right to use the resource.
> There are lots of examples. One I worked on dealt with grazing on the Navajo reservation in New Mexico. Tha Navajos let any Navajo graze their sheep on the pastures commonly owned by the Navajo nation on the reservation. So, that's what they did. Individuals grazed their sheep on the commons with no restriction on how many sheep or how many ranchers could do so.
> When the health of these pastures was compared to similar pastures owned by individuals, they were found to be less viable. The difference was that the individual owners of pastures controlled the number of sheep and the periods during which they could graze.
> That's one example of the commons. Fisheries, which I mentioned earlier, are another. There are lots of examples.
> So what does that have to do with book pricing? There are certainly many differences between Navajo pastures and the book market, and I concede them before anyone highlights them. The similarity is between the ability to enter the commons. The commons here is the eBook market. It's an interesting analysis. I imagine someone will write a book on it one of these days. Hmmm...


Applying your analogy, I would rather have people who have read the reviews (good and bad) buy my book rather than have someone buy simply because it was under a certain price. That is why as a direct result of this thread, I raised the price of my book ot $3.99. The better informed reader will enjoy the book more than an incidental reader.


----------



## sherylb (Oct 27, 2008)

Philip Chen said:


> The better informed reader will enjoy the book more than an incidental reader.


OUCH!


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

sherylb said:


> OUCH!


Sherylb,

I did not mean that as an insult; sorry, if it came out that way. I guess my message is that if one takes the time to read the reviews (good and bad) on any book before buying it, he or she will enjoy it more. That same reader arguably will be more amenable to paying a higher price.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"Applying your analogy, I would rather have people who have read the reviews (good and bad) buy my book rather than have someone buy simply because it was under a certain price. That is why as a direct result of this thread, I raised the price of my book ot $3.99. The better informed reader will enjoy the book more than an incidental reader."_

Sure. That's a rational approach, and I can't find any fault with that. The insidious nature of the theory of the commons is that it depends on individual rational choice to work its wreckage.
Another general idea that deals with this is the Fallacy of Composition, where individual decisions are all rational, but the aggregate effect is detrimental.
So, where is Hari Sheldon when we need him?


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Philip Chen said:


> Applying your analogy, I would rather have people who have read the reviews (good and bad) buy my book rather than have someone buy simply because it was under a certain price. That is why as a direct result of this thread, I raised the price of my book ot $3.99. The better informed reader will enjoy the book more than an incidental reader.


Are you trying to say that someone who only has a limited budget for books and restricts their buying habits to books under a certain price is less informed than someone has a bigger budget and is willing to shell out more money for a book?

If that's your position, you are not going to make any friends or sell any books because you are about to alienate a very large portion of potential readers who might be viewing this thread. That lemming comment from earlier still comes to mind.

Most people are willing to shell out more than $2.99 for a book provided they think the book is worth it. This is why marketing, reviews, word of mouth and other ways of getting the word out about your book is so important. Once an author becomes a known quantity to a reader, the reader is willing to pay more for that author's work. I don't think anyone was willing to shell out huge sums of money for Picasso's first work until after he became gained some noteriety. It's the same for authors.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

kyrin said:


> Currently, eBooks are considered sales like a normal book or record you would buy in a store. Authors are paid 25% royalties from traditional publishing houses for sales. If eBooks are considered liscences (ie like software for your computer and music), those publishers would have to pay much higher royalties.
> 
> A sale is a lot different from aquiring a license to use a product. I can't tell you all the differences because I'm not a lawyer and my knowledge of copyright law is limited. I think a license gives the owner of that license more control and protection than he or she has with a simple sale. Take a look at any license agreement to see what I mean. Most outline what can and cannot be done with a license.


I think that you have a point there. In a way, we are only granting a license, we are not "selling" the eBook. Even in a sale of a CD, the physical aspect of the sale is the piece of plastic, but your right to freely use it is still constrained by the license on the music that recorded thereon. For example, you cannot freely transcribe and sell copies of a CD without running afoul of copyright laws.

When a person buys a copy of an eBook, he is buying a license to download to his Kindle or eReader one copy of the work and to read it as many times as he might want. He can also share his physical Kindle to another person as many times as he wants. He cannot make a file of the eBook and distribute or sell the eBook to others, as that would be a violation of his license to read the book (i.e., copyright).

I have not practiced intellectual property law, but was a trial attorney in another life.


----------



## sherylb (Oct 27, 2008)

Philip Chen said:


> I did not mean that as an insult; sorry, if it came out that way.


No worries. Just a gentle reminder that readers do frequent all boards, and I for one do form opinions on the writers here based on their interactions with others.

On another note, I think you are putting entirely too much emphasis on reviews. As a person who reads 4-6 books a week, I sort of know by reading the blurb and downloading a sample if the book is good or not. The few times I have gone by reviews alone I have been very disappointed.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

kyrin said:


> Are you trying to say that someone who only has a limited budget for books and restricts their buying habits to books under a certain price is less informed than someone has a bigger budget and is willing to shell out more money for a book?


Please understand what I said, rather than generalize it.

What I said is that a person who reads the reviews on my book then buys it is informed about his purchase of my book. I did not say that some one who decides to limit his purchases under a certain limit is uninformed.

Presumably, even the person who has set a limit on the amount he wishes to spend may want to inform himself about my book and then make a decision as to whether he should make an exception to his rule; or not. In that case, he too has made an informed decision.

Whether one is or is not an established author can be one of the factors upon which one makes such an informed decision. Another way is to see what others have said about the book after reading it. This is what book reviews are all about.

Peace.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

sherylb said:


> No worries. Just a gentle reminder that readers do frequent all boards, and I for one do form opinions on the writers here based on their interactions with others.
> 
> On another note, I think you are putting entirely too much emphasis on reviews. As a person who reads 4-6 books a week, I sort of know by reading the blurb and downloading a sample if the book is good or not. The few times I have gone by reviews alone I have been very disappointed.


Understood. I, too, would want all data before making a decision. We think alike.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Philip Chen said:


> Sherylb,
> 
> I did not mean that as an insult; sorry, if it came out that way. I guess my message is that if one takes the time to read the reviews (good and bad) on any book before buying it, he or she will enjoy it more. That same reader arguably will be more amenable to paying a higher price.


Reviews are nice but I take all of them with a grain of salt. They don't have a huge effect on whether or not I buy a book unless there is an overwhelming number of bad reviews. Just because a book has gotten good reviews, it doesn't mean I will like it. I'll read through the reviews, see what they have to say and keep them in mind. My main deciding factor when buying a book especially from an unknown or new author will be the blurb and sample followed by the price unless that book has been recommended to me by a friend or family member who knows my reading habits.

For example, Twilight has over 3000 five star reviews. If I were to buy a book solely based on its reviews, then Twilight would be part of my library. It isn't. I couldn't get through the sample and the blurb made it sound more appealing to me. Add to that, a friend recommended against buying it.

Another example, an author I love can have a book selling for $9.99 but the book has average or no reviews, maybe even a bad one. I will still buy that book because the author had not let me down in the past. I'll keep the reviews in mind but it won't effect my decision on whether or not to buy the book. It might effect when I buy the book.

To sum it up, a good review does not make me more likely to spend more money on a book than I normally would. It does becoming a deciding factor if I am choosing between two books whose samples and authors I like who are selling their books for the same price. On the other hand, bad reviews (especially if the boook is more expensive book) from an unknown or new author will make it more likely that I will not buy the book.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Philip Chen said:


> Please understand what I said, rather than generalize it.
> 
> What I said is that a person who reads the reviews on my book then buys it is informed about his purchase of my book. I did not say that some one who decides to limit his purchases under a certain limit is uninformed.
> 
> ...


What you meant to say and how it came out are two different things. That's why I referenced the lemming remark from earlier.

Just about every reader who is choosing to buy or not buy a book is making an informed decision. Reviews are only one of many factors that go into a decision to buy a book. They may or may not play a part in an individuals decision. The price, the sample, the blurb, word of mouth, recommendation and other factors contribute to the decicion.

Let's face it. Reviews are written by strangers who may or may not be telling the truth. For a review to have any sort of value, you have to trust what the person is saying. The reviewer could have ulterior motives for posting a review. A while back someone posted a highly suspect bad review for your book. Would it be an informed decision on my part not to buy your book based solely on that person's word?

EDIT: Perhaps you might want to stop making generalizations and think about how your words might come across. You stated early that you didn't mean to insult anyone so it's probably clear to you that your words can be taken as an insult. It's almost as if you're saying an incidental reader doesn't read reviews or make an informed decision which is what I have issue with. Even someone buying a book on impulse is basing his or her decision on something otherwhese they would buy every book for kindle within their price range.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> If anyone is interested in barriers to entry theory an important aspect is called the Tragedy of the Commons. (Someone wrote a book with a title like that, but I forget who.) This essentially holds that a lack of property rights leads individuals to make rational decisions which, in aggregate, destroy or degrade the common resource. This degradation is measured against similar resources in which property rights exist. Property rights in this sense refer to a right to use the resource.
> There are lots of examples. One I worked on dealt with grazing on the Navajo reservation in New Mexico. Tha Navajos let any Navajo graze their sheep on the pastures commonly owned by the Navajo nation on the reservation. So, that's what they did. Individuals grazed their sheep on the commons with no restriction on how many sheep or how many ranchers could do so.
> When the health of these pastures was compared to similar pastures owned by individuals, they were found to be less viable. The difference was that the individual owners of pastures controlled the number of sheep and the periods during which they could graze.
> That's one example of the commons. Fisheries, which I mentioned earlier, are another. There are lots of examples.
> So what does that have to do with book pricing? There are certainly many differences between Navajo pastures and the book market, and I concede them before anyone highlights them. The similarity is between the ability to enter the commons. The commons here is the eBook market. It's an interesting analysis. I imagine someone will write a book on it one of these days. Hmmm...


Yes, the Tragedy of the Commons is an important principle. (I tend to bring it up a lot in terms of explaining internet resources.)

And I very much agree it has to do with ebooks, the the effect I see is more oblique.

The thing that makes the Commons less valuable is overuse - so it isn't related to the issue you brought up earlier with fishing (that the market settles at lowest cause) but rather to the collapse of the fish population that's currently going on. (THAT collapse is regardless of price and has a whole lot of other factors going on.)

As for the commons being the market: This is something that Seth Godin and other modern marketers go into a lot. (And it seems to me that Toffler talked about this in The Third Wave but I lost my copy of that a LONG time ago and I could be embroidering.) In the previous paradigm, "attention" was a free resource, and so mass advertising and push marketing were king. Godin calls this the "Television-Industrial" complex - the idea that the audience has a limited choice (three TV channels and no cable) and the best marketing choice was "interruption" marketing - to force people to listen by interrupting their favorite TV shows. They have no choice but to listen.

We're now in a long tail world. People can get exactly what they want, at the price they want, and they don't have to watch our ads. As a matter of fact, they get really P.O.'d when we try to demand it - because that pasture has already been over-grazed. It's not just spam and advertising - everything is clamoring for the attention of the modern consumer.

And as a result, traditional advertising works less and less well. Word of mouth is more and more important. An because the consumer is used to getting exactly what he or she wants, they are less and less likely to buy the best seller. Since people can more easily find the item that fits their taste, needs and mood more exactly, they no longer settle for the most popular or most familiar. There still _are_ best sellers, but the proportion of the market they command gets smaller.

This is why there has been a rise in artisan products, even in hard times, and even in poorer areas. Desires, prices, quantities, etc are less uniform and less influenced by the overall market.

One of the things that turned me on to Seth Godin was his recommendation for the cure for this over-grazing of the attention of the consumer: You have to be or have a Purple Cow - you have to be remarkable. "Remarkable" means something that causes people to remark. It spawns word of mouth. Now that doesn't have to be excellence - it can be something else, like fitting a niche really really really well. (Or a low price, or amazing service....)

I agree that every successful system has the seeds of its own downfall - but I don't pretend to know if we're even in the bubble mode yet, or what the collapse or major change will take. I just know that the game has seriously changed.

Camille


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

I suspect that the "bursting of the bubbles" (for indies) will be when traditional publishing catches a clue and drops their prices on eBooks to compete with indies.  When I got my Kindle a few months ago I only bought trad. pubbed books - I didn't know there was a whole indie thing to choose from.  Once I discovered indies - let me say that I haven't bought a traditionally published book in about two months.  I'm not sure if I will, either, to tell you the truth.  If I was going to do it, it would have been fro The Iron Duke.  I was really looking forward to that.  For $10?  Not so much.

What does this mean?  I'm sure other Kindle users are going through the same thing as I did.  Eventually, I think, the Big 6 will lose enough eBook sales that they'll start dropping their prices.  Once they're in the same range as indies (or at least lower than they are now) they'll see an upsurge again.  People will still read indies - after all, they've found authors they love.  But they'll also start buying "Big Names" again.  That's the whole "reader's time" part of the equation.

What does this mean for indies?  I think it means that the time to get your name out there is now - that this is a golden period of opportunity.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Arkali said:


> I suspect that the "bursting of the bubbles" (for indies) will be when traditional publishing catches a clue and drops their prices on eBooks to compete with indies. ....
> What does this mean for indies? I think it means that the time to get your name out there is now - that this is a golden period of opportunity.


I'm not so sure about that being a problem. The reason is because the burst of a bubble has to do with something that collapses a market. I think for indies, changes that affect just them could happen (Amazon changing some policies, etc.) and so I'm willing to take those other kinds of events into consideration even if they aren't a real market collapse.

But competition from the big boys... I don't see that as a disaster scenario for indies. That is happening now, and I see it as expanding the market. It's a rising tide that lifts all boats in a few ways - not the least of which will be that there will be many more new writers who have only ebook editions out there who have professional covers and quality. Right now, we have a lot of resistance to indies because it's a lot easier to "spot the indie." But when the big boys start imitating the successful indies (which many are already talking about, not just on price, but on the ebook only offerings, etc.) that will help all.

I think the thing that hurts us most is the sheer number of indies - all clamoring for attention in the exact same places. We are indeed overgrazing the market in terms of promotion. We are destroying a resource over in the Amazon Communities. Writers who take their time to build their audience, use a much wider variety of methods to get their work out there, they'll be able to compete. (And actually may have an easier time of it.)

IMHO, "getting your name out there now" may or may not help you, but it's that push that is creating a new tragedy of the commons and is causing the window of easy opportunity to slow or stop.

Camille


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"The thing that makes the Commons less valuable is overuse - so it isn't related to the issue you brought up earlier with fishing (that the market settles at lowest cause) but rather to the collapse of the fish population that's currently going on."_

The issue I brought up previously dealt with a lack of barriers to entry. I agree damage to the commons comes from overuse. The overuse is due to a lack of barriers to entry. That lack of barriers is what leads to the effect you highlight, like the depletion of the fishery. That is one effect. Another effect is the price falls to average cost.
The market definitely does not settle at the lowest cost. It settles where price equals average cost for producers. At that point, an additional producer will have to sell below average cost. The effect of this is 1) he will not enter the market becaus he will lose money, or 2) he will enter, forcing all prices below average cost, causing another producer to exit and bring prices back up to average cost. In fisheries this has been shown to be a quite stable and self-balancing system.
One way we might think of this is that we are all in Amazon's pasture, and Amazon is letting anyone graze. B&N, SONY, and Apple all have their own pastures, and they, too are letting anyone graze. But, we have to remember they own those pastures and can change the rules at will. (Does this sound like I'm channeling Chance the Gardener?)


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

Sherylb and kyrin,

My earlier remarks were made in response to what I read in the posts suggesting that $2.99 was a price point for new authors and my reaction to that mentality. I am in agreement that buyers of eBooks make informed judgments as to whether a book should or should not be purchased. However, I do not think that an artifical limit of any amount should be the overwhelming factor in arriving at that judgment. Why $2.99 and not $0.99 or $4.99. The amount is simply a number, nothing more. 

With respect to the one bad review that I got, I accept on face value that the review was the sincere feeling of the poster. People deciding to buy or not buy my book need to weigh those sentiments against the sentiments of others posting good reviews. I hope that you will note I was more curious why the person felt compelled to invent the tag, "bad fiction", or something like that. I actually had a lot of fun posting about it. 

(Note: I'm posting from my Blackberry so please excuse any typos etc)


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

I think some people, especially on the Amazon community forums, take things too far in their quest to market their books. I haven't posted there because in some ways it's a bad place for authors. I think its important to get your name out there but you have to do it in such a way that you don't alienate your potential readers. Just bombarding one particular venue doesn't work.

The sheer number of indie authors does hurt us some but it's also becoming harder to differentiate the better indie publications from the traditional ones. That's working in favor of the indies. The other factor in our favor is out flexability. We can react faster to changes in the market than traditional publishers. I'm amazed that a traditional publishing company hasn't listed a book on Kindle Nation Daily. Someone probably has submitted a request in triplicate to do so and the idea is under consideration pending review.

I also feel indies, for the most part, are more in tune with their readers. There is no middle man to get in the way. An author published through a traditional publisher might want his or her books to be sold in a certain way and for a certain price but he can't do it unless he's able to negotiate something special in his contract.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Philip Chen said:


> Sherylb and kyrin,
> 
> My earlier remarks were made in response to what I read in the posts suggesting that $2.99 was a price point for new authors and my reaction to that mentality. I am in agreement that buyers of eBooks make informed judgments as to whether a book should or should not be purchased. However, I do not think that an artifical limit of any amount should be the overwhelming factor in arriving at that judgment. Why $2.99 and not $0.99 or $4.99. The amount is simply a number, nothing more.
> 
> ...


That "artificial" limit is most of the time a very real limit. If my budget for the week leaves me with only $9 to spend on books, it is a factor in determining which books I will buy. If a book is over that amount, no matter how good it is, I can't and won't buy it. I just don't have enough money. Not every reader has the same budget for books. My budget for books changes based on a number of factors. Some months I will spend more, other months I will spend less.

Keep in mind, readers are also consumers. Some consumers shop for bargains. If you go to a store and see several no-name/generic products do you buy the one for $9 or three that are selling for $3. Yes, books are different but you can see my point. Even if you take reviews into account and blurbs/samples, some consumers might be more likely to buy three highly rated $3 books instead of one highly rated $9 book.

In general, a new author who prices their book towards the upper end of my budget will have to wow me with their blurb and sample or have a friend recommend them. There has to be something to set them apart. Without that something working in your favor, you're expecting a lot from potential readers.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

Kyrin,

I share that last sentiment entirely. My experience with traditional publishing is if it doesn't fit the model entirely then "it isn't strong enough".

[edited to fix typo]


----------



## Richardcrasta (Jul 29, 2010)

Good points. For me, there is a still more complex issue: I don't manufacture books at the rate of one a year. It took me nine years to write and finish "The Revised Kama Sutra", and the book has received over 40 reviews (and I don't know how many it received in the foreign languages, because no one told me), and most readers have told me they have never read a book like it. It is a piece of me, a bleeding, living thing. In nine years, with my educational qualifications (two masters degrees), I could have earned a minimum of half a million dollars in any other job.

If I published a book every year or two, then I would have no hesitation selling a book for $2.99--it would just be commerce. But I don't: I have published six books (a seventh has been sold, and five more in progress) in 25 years of being a writer.

So don't treat all books as if they were the same thing. Let it be acceptable that while Pynchon's Mason & Dixon, at 1000 plus pages, costs $17, his 150+ page book, "The Crying of Lot 49," costs $7.99.  I have 2 books up at the moment, one at $5.49 (the one that took 9 years), and another at 3.99, because they are completely different things.

Also, by the way, one cannot always define an author such as me as Indie and non-Indie. Three of my books have been published by commercial publishers, but 4 have been published only by me, and in these books, I have taken major risks, and lost money--believing in the books, and unwilling to compromise with censorship. I have struggled for freedom of expression all my life.


----------



## Richardcrasta (Jul 29, 2010)

One more factor that makes a published book different from a self-published Kindle book: Perhaps the comparison of royalties earned with a Kindle book with that from a commercially published book is not a fair one. A commercially published book has the reputation of the publisher, and the publisher's own commercial interests, behind it. So even if you make only $2 per copy, they could sell a hundred thousand copies a lot more easily than I could (I am far from selling even a hundred!), because I am among a million self-published authors trying to tell the reader, "Me, me! Please look at me!" I am sure there are a few exceptional success stories, but in general, self-publishing and marketing on Kindle is not easy at all, when you consider the time we have to put into it. That is why, I don't think anyone should grudge us getting $4 as royalty per book instead of $2.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> I'm not so sure about that being a problem. The reason is because the burst of a bubble has to do with something that collapses a market. I think for indies, changes that affect just them could happen (Amazon changing some policies, etc.) and so I'm willing to take those other kinds of events into consideration even if they aren't a real market collapse.
> 
> But competition from the big boys... I don't see that as a disaster scenario for indies. That is happening now, and I see it as expanding the market. It's a rising tide that lifts all boats in a few ways - not the least of which will be that there will be many more new writers who have only ebook editions out there who have professional covers and quality. Right now, we have a lot of resistance to indies because it's a lot easier to "spot the indie." But when the big boys start imitating the successful indies (which many are already talking about, not just on price, but on the ebook only offerings, etc.) that will help all.
> 
> I think the thing that hurts us most is the sheer number of indies - all clamoring for attention in the exact same places. We are indeed overgrazing the market in terms of promotion. We are destroying a resource over in the Amazon Communities. Writers who take their time to build their audience, use a much wider variety of methods to get their work out there, they'll be able to compete. (And actually may have an easier time of it.)


Good post. To clarify a few things - a price drop from the big 6 won't create a collapsing market, no - just that it will put indies in more direct competition with the big name authors, and at that point, presumably, indies won't be able to leverage a lower price point the way they are now. HOWEVER - I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. If the Big 6 lower their eBook prices, that will encourage more people to purchase eReaders, which will increase audience / customer base.



daringnovelist said:


> IMHO, "getting your name out there now" may or may not help you, but it's that push that is creating a new tragedy of the commons and is causing the window of easy opportunity to slow or stop.


Totally not what I meant. I believe it's possible to "get your name out there" without annoying the hell out of your target audience. I was in no way trying to imply that you should spam your wares (which is what those authors you mentioned are doing) to all and sundry. No, I meant via more acceptable means, and also the means that will pay off long-term - that is: work on achieving a backlist, make sure your books are professional quality, build a fan base.


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

Richardcrasta said:


> One more factor that makes a published book different from a self-published Kindle book: Perhaps the comparison of royalties earned with a Kindle book with that from a commercially published book is not a fair one. A commercially published book has the reputation of the publisher, and the publisher's own commercial interests, behind it. So even if you make only $2 per copy, they could sell a hundred thousand copies a lot more easily than I could (I am far from selling even a hundred!), because I am among a million self-published authors trying to tell the reader, "Me, me! Please look at me!" I am sure there are a few exceptional success stories, but in general, self-publishing and marketing on Kindle is not easy at all, when you consider the time we have to put into it. That is why, I don't think anyone should grudge us getting $4 as royalty per book instead of $2.


The remainder bins in the bookshops and department stores at my local shopping centre are full to overflowing with books written by people I have never heard of. Surely for every Pratchett or King there are a hundred authors who barely crack the double figures in sales? How much could they be making from books that are selling for next to nothing?

A nice link that outlines why the publishing industry is a little concerned with how things are going: http://www.philcooke.com/book_publishing


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

The Reluctant Geek said:


> The remainder bins in the bookshops and department stores at my local shopping centre are full to overflowing with books written by people I have never heard of. Surely for every Pratchett or King there are a hundred authors who barely crack the double figures in sales? How much could they be making from books that are selling for next to nothing?
> 
> A nice link that outlines why the publishing industry is a little concerned with how things are going: http://www.philcooke.com/book_publishing


More like tens of thousands.

I used to work in a furniture store. There were tons of hard cover books all over the place as decor. When they went out of business, there were a couple of sofa boxes in the warehouse filled with these books. It was my chance to stock up so I grabbed a couple of bags full. Not one was worth reading.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

I have my doubts that the big six can drop their price all the way down to $2.99. The writer still gets a cut. Amazon takes their cut. There are quite a few fingers in the pie. 

And no one really knows what share of the market ebooks will end up with. Ten years from now will all but used bookstores be gone? Will ebook sales account for 90% of the market? Or will demand level off at 40% share, or 50% share? It makes a difference if paper book sales are still viable. The big six, in whatever semblance they remain, may still make the bulk of their money from paper books and as a result keep their own ebook prices high.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Not necessarily $2.99, no.  But $5.99?  $4.99?  Those might be doable.  As you say, though, we'll see.  Time will tell


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Arkali said:


> Not necessarily $2.99, no. But $5.99? $4.99? Those might be doable. As you say, though, we'll see. Time will tell


Some of the older sci fi and fantasy books from Baen (a division of Penguin) are available for around $5.99 or for free. Maybe they might lower the price of more recent releases.

And not to derail this thread but the Baen Free Library is filled with awesomness. I picked up a number of books that I owned when they were only in papperback.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Thanks!  I'll have to check that out.  I've been meaning to and just haven't gotten around to it


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

kyrin said:


> And not to derail this thread but the Baen Free Library is filled with awesomness. I picked up a number of books that I owned when they were only in papperback.


Well, there goes November's productivity....


----------



## J.R. Chase (Jun 22, 2010)

My sales tripled when I went from $2.99 to $1.99.  I believe getting sales as an indie is critical - if you are not selling, you are not getting recommended by Amazon, you aren't being seen, and it won't matter what you charge, you won't get sales.

I'm of the view that more sales does start a virtuous cycle of sales where Amazon gives the readers, "those who bought this bought that" and it makes all the difference.  Fewer sales at a higher price is bad news - fewer recommendations means fewer and fewer sales over time.

If you read Amazon forums, you'll see a lot of disgruntled readers who refuse to pay publishers' prices.  Many avid readers bought a Kindle hoping to recoup costs through cheaper books.  Those are good customers to aim for.  

The print market still dominates, so big writers aren't terribly concerned about Kindle sales at the moment.  

But really, if you want to charge $4.99 or $7.99 or $9.99, knock yourself out.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

J.R. Chase said:


> My sales tripled when I went from $2.99 to $1.99. I believe getting sales as an indie is critical - if you are not selling, you are not getting recommended by Amazon, you aren't being seen, and it won't matter what you charge, you won't get sales.
> 
> I'm of the view that more sales does start a virtuous cycle of sales where Amazon gives the readers, "those who bought this bought that" and it makes all the difference. Fewer sales at a higher price is bad news - fewer recommendations means fewer and fewer sales over time.
> 
> If you read Amazon forums, you'll see a lot of disgruntled readers who refuse to pay publishers' prices. Many avid readers bought a Kindle hoping to recoup costs through cheaper books. Those are good customers to aim for.


Tripled sales at $1.99 = one sale at $2.99. That works!

And I think the $2.99 and under prices are here to stay -- lots of readers want bargains and are going to continue to look for bargains.

One hidden cost of a Kindle and other e-readers that may emerge may be the cost of replacement of the device. These things don't last forever. Readers may as a result be even more determined to find inexpensive ebooks.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

The Reluctant Geek said:


> Well, there goes November's productivity....


I wouldn't worry about it. The library has been going for over a year.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

Well, I sold my first book at the new price of $3.99 last night.  No increase in traffic from before, but no decrease either.


----------

