# NYT: When to Schedule E-Book Releases



## GMUHistorian (Jul 1, 2009)

Hi all,

I just saw this article published by the New York Times, When to Schedule E-Book Releases. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/books/15ebooks.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss The NYT uses Dan Brown's The Lost Symbol and Knopf Doubleday's decision not to commit to releasing an e-book version of Brown's book on the same day as the paper version, to discuss the release dates of e-books.

John Grisham, as a lot of you probably already know, has never allowed his books to be released in e-book form. Stephen King also states that he and his publisher also are "thinking and talking about electronic publishing and how to deal with those issues." Apparently Grisham may be coming around though, Doubleday is supposedly releasing an e-book (the NYT didn't specify it's a Kindle version) of _Ford County_ the short story collection by Grisham scheduled to be published this fall. Random House seems like the only publisher willing to commit to the e-book of major works by well known authors being released on the same day as their paper version. According to the NYT, the forthcoming books of John Irving, E.L. Doctorow and Jon Krakauer will be released in e-book form the same day as the paper version.

The most frustrating thing about publishers even having this discussion is that it's based upon an absolutely false premise that e-books cannibalize the sales of paper books. Publishers still don't "get it" about the new frontier of books and publishing, which is why it's no wonder that their sales are down since the last _Harry Potter_ book was published. According to the NYT, a consultant who advises publishers on "digital issues" states that the numbers show that "People who read e-books don't buy physical books, and people who buy physical books don't buy e-books." E-books (and principally the Kindle format I'd guess) only represent about 1-2 percent of book sales. Again, publishers seem like they still don't get it. Their profit margins aren't significantly down because of e-books, they're down because people aren't reading, and the numbers show that if they don't release a big title in Kindle or other e-book format on the same day as the paper book is released, it's not going to gain them many sales because the "users" of the formats don't traditionally cross over. Furthermore, the NYT article states that an e-book version actually gets a publisher higher profit margins than a paper version! So, to me, you'd think they'd want to push the format and reduce the amount of paper books they publish because it would increase their profit margins not to have to pay for printing and shipping costs.

As for me, I am one of the seemingly few who read both paper and e-books, although I'd prefer to read Dan Brown's book on my Kindle if I can do it on the same day as the paper edition is released. Amazon's spokesperson is quoted as saying that Kindle users "expect new releases to be available on Kindle and we'll work hard to continue to meet those expectations." But is there much, if anything, Amazon can really do beyond what they're already doing in subsidizing the price point, to force publishers to release the Kindle edition on the same day as the paper edition?

If _Lost Symbol_ or another book by a major author is held back in e-book form this year and not released on the same day, will you buy the paper edition or simply wait for the Kindle edition? I'm in that boat myself with next week's release of Daniel Silva's new book _The Defector._ Silva admits he's not a big proponent of technology, admitting in an email to fans his house was a "Facebook and Twitter free zone" until seeing a fan's Facebook page for his books and liking it so much he decided to get into the act...although he still says he doesn't know how to do much on it himself yet. I hope his book will be released on Kindle on the same day as the paper version, and I don't know what I'll do if it isn't.

Delaying publication of the Kindle version may be publishers new strategy to attack the format we love.


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

Just as I currently wait for a paperback because I refuse to pay hardcover prices, I will wait for a decently priced kindle book because I will continue to refuse to pay hardcover prices.  Publishers should realize the e-books can increase their sales, since we can't lend our kindle copies to people and if we suggest a book to friends, they'll need to get their own.


----------



## Scheherazade (Apr 11, 2009)

I'd wait.  There's plenty of other things I have to read that are on my Kindle so it will take a lot to get me to go back to a paper book.  Unfortunately another aspect they aren't considering is piracy.  If a book is popular enough and they don't offer it electronically, someone else will and people who would have normally bought it would download it illegally.  Not everyone, but enough that I think they'd see a significant drop in sales than if they released it the same day.  I also don't really see Stephen King doing anything against ebooks, he's been a proponent of them since the beginning.


----------



## GMUHistorian (Jul 1, 2009)

Scarlet you make a very good point about why publishers should support e-books and the Kindle. It completely eliminates the secondary market! Although that made me think about libraries...what's the 21st century version of a library going to look like in 30 years? 

It now appears, on some new books at least, Amazon has caved in to the publishers, and probably their own economic realities, on the prices. I wouldn't be surprised to see this occur with Dan Brown's book. As I said, I'm an avid fan of Daniel Siva's books and his new book _The Defector_ is scheduled to be released July 21. I just went to Amazon.com and they've already got the Kindle page up for pre-order, and the book isn't $9.99 as I expected it to be. It's $14.82. That's only $1.03 less than the Amazon price of $15.85 for the printed book.

I wish Amazon had commented more in depth for the NYT story. I would not be surprised to see most of our favorite blockbuster authors who have books published this year to have them released on the Kindle the same day as their printed book, but I think it's probably likely that the prices we've grown accustomed to will rise. Amazon can't afford to keep subsidizing the $9.99 price point forever. The NYT ran an article about this a couple months ago.

To me, I think Amazon ought to really start pushing how e-books are environmentally friendly. After all, it seems the "Go Green" idea has worked for other companies, Amazon should jump on the bandwagon and push that an e-book format instead of a printed book format would save trees and the environment. The prices have been wonderful and it's great that Amazon is trying their best to keep them down and offer a significant savings from the printed book, but IMO we're probably going to see the last of that (on brand new titles at least) this year. For me, even if the Kindle version is the same price as the printed book, the convenience and the storage factor will still cause me to buy the Kindle version. It's a lot easier to travel with my Kindle and have tons of books at my finger tips than it is to bring their printed versions along with me!

Scheherazade, they actually are considering piracy according to the NYT article, and that's why some publishers _don't_ want to release an e-book version of their big titles. According to the article, one publisher (can't recall if it was Dan Brown's publisher or not) thinks that if the book is released in an e-book form, which obviously means it has to be sent electronically to Amazon and other places that sell e-books, that will increase the likelihood that a pirated version is out there, or details of the book are leaked. Frankly, I think they're all wrong about that. E-book version or not, the details of any _Harry Potter_ book are going to come out on the 'net one way or another. Usually I think it's always happened in the past because somebody who saw a paper copy talked too much, not because an electronic version got stolen. I'm quite sure Amazon's got layer upon layer of security for the systems they use to get e-books from publishers.


----------



## mlewis78 (Apr 19, 2009)

My4brats posted this link in Twitter. It's on the same topic from a blog:

http://booksquare.com/tis-better-to-lose-a-sale-than-sell-an-ebook/

Marti


----------



## KReader (Jul 7, 2009)

personally, I'll wait and I'll wait until the ebook is available at a reasonable price.  Since I'm waiting anyway, I'll be able to read the reviews of Dan Brown's new book.  If they're highly favorable, I'll certainly be willing to pay $10 to $15 (but hopefully $9.99) for the book.  If they aren't, I'll wait until it drops to the $5 to $7 range or I will pick up a used copy or I'll get it from the library -- And I'm a pretty big Dan Brown fan.

There just aren't many authors that I'm willing to pay $15 to $20 dollars for a book - not when I can buy 5 or 6 Indie published books that are probably every bit as enjoyable for that same $20.


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/books/15ebooks.html?_r=1&hpw


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

This troubles me "At least one publisher has made a decision to withhold an e-book edition of a forthcoming book to preserve demand for a hardcover edition. Sourcebooks, an independent publisher, is releasing “Bran Hambric: The Farfield Curse,” a novel aimed at children, in September in hardcover. It will hold back the e-book until six months later.

Dominique Raccah, chief executive of Sourcebooks, said she wanted to prevent the cannibalization of hardcover sales. “If you as a consumer can look at a book and say: ‘I have two products; one is $27.95, and the other is $9.95. Which should I buy?’ ” Ms. Raccah said, “that’s not a difficult decision.” "

Why is it that some publishers don't get that what many people are asking for is a change in price that reflects the diminished production needs? That is what I am looking for. That should not cut into their profit margin.

Sony must be hating this. Every article I see on E-readers focuses on the Kindle and Amazon. I am surprised that Sony has not done more to get its e-reader out there and to let people know that the Kindle is not the only e-reader that matters.


----------



## L.Canton (Jan 21, 2009)

The article is quite interesting, but I agree that the price of eBooks does not reflect the reduced production costs. Having said that, I imagine that most of the cost is in writing the book, and not necessarily in having it printed.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

I would wait, just as I waited for paperbacks.

As for the price of the new Dan Brown novel, Amazon's promotions, as I recall them, say "NYTimes bestsellers $9.99!"  If a book isn't even available yet, it's not on the NYTimes bestseller list yet, and they can ask anything they want.  In most markets, you pay a premium for being one of the first on the block to have something.  *shrug*

If you think the book is too much, don't buy it!  Supply and Demand drive price.

Betsy


----------



## tsemple (Apr 27, 2009)

It is silly that they are afraid of cannibalism. They have to realize that there's no time like the present to make a sale, rather than making people wait - it is not as though there is a shortage of interesting books to read.


----------



## GMUHistorian (Jul 1, 2009)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> I would wait, just as I waited for paperbacks.
> 
> As for the price of the new Dan Brown novel, Amazon's promotions, as I recall them, say "NYTimes bestsellers $9.99!" If a book isn't even available yet, it's not on the NYTimes bestseller list yet, and they can ask anything they want. In most markets, you pay a premium for being one of the first on the block to have something. *shrug*
> 
> ...


Betsy,

Amazon's changed their promotion just a little bit, and that's what makes me think the days of $9.99 pricing are almost over. The new promotion on the Kindle books page is "New York Times Best Sellers and New Releases are $9.99, unless marked otherwise" That "unless marked otherwise" thing is the rub. Since his last book did so well, I think Silva's book probably hits the NYT Best Seller list the first week it's available. Amazon actually _dropping_ the price after that to me makes no sense. Why drop the price on something so popular? A book like Silva's probably hits $9.99 or better within a month or two though. He's very good but he's not a blockbuster sensation like Brown. I think Brown's book hits #1 on Kindle and in paper the first day it's released and doesn't move for weeks, if not months.

But, like I said, I'm okay with the prices going up a little bit because the added convenience of e-books is why I got a Kindle in the first place, not because of the book prices. Plus, Amazon's built up a lot of good will with me. I love the fact they allow free books for the Kindle to be sent via Whispernet, and the fact those free books aren't junk. I've gotten a lot of classics I've not read yet for free lately and plan to read all of them. Plus, Paranoia (the current Kindle #1 seller) seems like it's good too and it's for free as well.


----------



## KasperKindler (Feb 17, 2009)

I too would certainly wait.  Example - I was waiting for the Paper Back of Denis Lehane's "The Given Day."  I think it was first published end the end of Summer 08.  I waited and waited and waited for the paper back.  Got my Kindle in Feb 09 - guess what my first download was...? I don't really care what it cost - I just wanted to read it, in non-hardback format! Convenience and portability rock!


----------



## KimmyA (Dec 11, 2008)

I don't buy hardback books. I only read books once so it doesn't pay, for me, to pay that kind of money and then get rid of the book. So waiting to release the ebook isn't going to make me say "oh well, I'll get the hardback now". I don't want to read your book THAT badly. I'll wait.



> But, he said: "I don't think you want to withhold content from the public. I'm pretty sure that when a customer decides to buy a Kindle, they are making a decision to start becoming an e-book consumer."


This is me. Once I bought the kindle, I want to read all my books on it. I've only bought a few books recently but that was only because the goodwill store had a 50% off everything that day. I paid 50 cents for those used books.



> For now, Amazon is taking a loss on each e-book it sells because it generally pays publishers half of the hardcover list price on new releases. So publishers who delay releasing e-books run the risk of losing sales, for which they are now getting higher margins than they are on print books.


I don't know what publishers are paid and someone can correct me, but if Amazon is paying them half of the hardcover price, why do they care if the book is sold for less? They're still getting their money, right?


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

There were two almost identical topics, one in Let's Talk Kindle and one in the Book Corner that we've merged, thanks!

Betsy


----------



## marianneg (Nov 4, 2008)

GMUHistorian said:


> Amazon's changed their promotion just a little bit, and that's what makes me think the days of $9.99 pricing are almost over. The new promotion on the Kindle books page is "New York Times Best Sellers and New Releases are $9.99, unless marked otherwise"


That's not new; the policy has always been worded like that.


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

May I ask a question out of ignorance?  Why are electronic versions of books priced the same as printed books?  I mean, aren't production costs less and there's really no shipping involved?  

And I agree with something else said here, amazon should be toting the green benefits of e-books, that will get a lot of people to think about it more.


----------



## Mycroft (Jan 10, 2009)

scarlet,
    Publishers and folks close to the publishing process contend that most of the cost of producing a book still apply to electronic versions and that the cost of paper, printing and distribution are a relatively small percent of the total cost.  Even if that's the case I would argue that the list price of the electronic version should at least reflect that reduced cost. But then more economically minded folks might contend that the price a good is sold for doesn't necessary correlate to the cost to produce that good.

  To answer the original question, I would wait for the Kindle version. I rarely bought any DTB's before getting my Kindle (in January, 200 - I got most of my books from the library, although I did also receive them as presents for birthdays and Christmas.  I've only read one DTB since getting my Kindle, and that was a gift. 

  Having said that, I don't know that I agree with the person quoted in the article saying that Kindle readers don't buy paper books - I think that many Kindlers do still buy paper books when the Kindle version is not yet available.


----------



## Chad Winters (Oct 28, 2008)

the funny thing is most of the "pirated copies" are reportedly scanned PDFs of hardcover books. Not making digital copies will not present someone from scanning each page into an ebook(which apparently can be done in a quick, automated way now). So they are really just being illogical.


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

Chad Winters (#102) said:


> the funny thing is most of the "pirated copies" are reportedly scanned PDFs of hardcover books. Not making digital copies will not present someone from scanning each page into an ebook(which apparently can be done in a quick, automated way now). So they are really just being illogical.


LOL I had not thought of that. So by not making the book available on the same day as the Hardback, they are increasing the likelihood of pirating the book. heheheh


----------



## Chad Winters (Oct 28, 2008)

Mycroft said:


> Having said that, I don't know that I agree with the person quoted in the article saying that Kindle readers don't buy paper books - I think that many Kindlers do still buy paper books when the Kindle version is not yet available.


I think we may buy more. Now when I read a book a like and want others to read I am likely to buy them a physical copy and send it to them. That's 2 or 3 sales that the author/pub probably would not have gotten before


----------



## KimmyA (Dec 11, 2008)

Chad Winters (#102) said:


> the funny thing is most of the "pirated copies" are reportedly scanned PDFs of hardcover books. Not making digital copies will not present someone from scanning each page into an ebook(which apparently can be done in a quick, automated way now). So they are really just being illogical.


I can't understand why they don't get that. A quick search on google and I could easily get pirated copies of Grisham or Rowlings' books. You would think they would realize that and make the ebooks themselves.


----------



## GMUHistorian (Jul 1, 2009)

KimmyA said:


> I can't understand why they don't get that. A quick search on google and I could easily get pirated copies of Grisham or Rowlings' books. You would think they would realize that and make the ebooks themselves.


The publishing, movie and of course the music industry has quite a lot they don't understand about piracy. First of all, they contend that they lose X amount of dollars per year due to piracy. The problem with that theory is that it pre-supposes that pirates would have purchased the stuff they got for free illegally. That makes no sense at all. Most pirates, according to articles I've read, won't actually buy the material they get for free if they didn't get it for free.

You're also right, the NYT a month or two ago did an article about the "rise" of book piracy on sites like Scribed.com and others since the release of the Kindle. Most the pirated versions found on those sites are scanned versions of printed books, not books in a proprietary format like the one for the Kindle.

The basic problem IMO is basically resistance to change by the leadership of a lot of publishing houses, movie and music studios. They were comfortable in the same business model they've had for years. Now in the past couple years it's all changing and instead of trying to get out in front of it, they're trying to push it back into the same business model they've always had. The companies who get out in front of it will be the ones who make the most money.

I think that's why Amazon has done such a great thing in releasing the Kindle. E-book sales are only 1-2 percent of sales now but that's because the cost of entry (the Kindle) is so expensive, and it's a down economy. Amazon was just able to drop the price to a more manageable level for people, and probably sooner rather than later they'll be able to drop the price further because the cost of parts and production will get cheaper. As the Kindle gets cheaper, the more people I think will buy one. When Amazon's able to drop the price to around $150-200, I think that's when it'll truly explode.


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

e-books might only be 1-2% of overall book sales but e-books are 35% of sales when both the Kindle version and DTB are available at Amazon. As the number of Kindles grow, that percentage is going to grow. If I were a publisher, that is the number I would be looking at.


----------



## ginaf20697 (Jan 31, 2009)

I always love this logic. Sorry but if the book isn't available for the Kindle or the price is exorbitant, guess what? I borrow it from the library.


----------



## Selcien (Oct 31, 2008)

Well, I hope they figure it out 'cause outside of The Wheel of Time series there is zero chance that I'll buy any books in paper form.


----------

