Comments on: Amazon. Fail?

By: J

Sun, 07 Feb 2010 04:35:01 +0000

Yea, exactly. And who wants to buy a book twice? Well.. /most/ of the time anyway. If I did use e-books, I’d want them easily transferrable. I’d want to be able to read it on any device I had handy, picking up where I left off. Find yourself in an unexpected line somewhere, pull out your cell phone, read a few pages. Get home and curl up with the paperback.

Stuck on a long drive somewhere? Have your e-reader read the book aloud to you. Not as good as an audiobook, but certainly decent enough.

By: K

Sat, 06 Feb 2010 20:30:25 +0000

And that would work far better for me, personally, because what I really want is easily transportable copies of books I own in physical form. I don’t want books in JUST ebook format.

By: K

Sat, 06 Feb 2010 20:29:02 +0000

Now that is an idea. I do really like the idea of getting an electronic copy free with the physical book. Or even at a slight extra charge (maybe $2).

Because really, that’s what you get when you buy a cd — it’s so simple to make a digital copy from it.

By: J

Thu, 04 Feb 2010 01:55:40 +0000

A subscription model might work well. So much a year, and you get every Patterson that comes out. So much a year, you get every Tor title that comes out.

Theoretically, that’s good for the publishers. I might subscribe to a science fiction or fantasy imprint, when there’s no way I was ever going to buy all of those books. Or probably buy even more than 2 of a particular imprint in a given year. But to pay a little bit more, to have them all, in case I _did_ want to read them… Even better if they were downloaded wirelessly.

Imagine reading the next Harry Potter, while you’re standing in line at 12:01am to buy your hardcover copy. Which you’re going to get at a discount, because they’ve paired it with the ebook.

By: K

Wed, 03 Feb 2010 02:30:36 +0000

See, that’s the thing. I’m not against variable pricing. But I do not think any ebook should be more than 9.99 and in fact I do believe that the vast majority should be far far less. 3.99 for backlist, 5.99 for a new title out in paperback, maybe 7 or 8.99 for a new hardback.

Now, I can see why they don’t like this, because the publishers have been busily promoting throwaway blockbusters for years. I reread Pride and Prejudice every year, but I do not reread Sue Grafton or Janet Evanovich or James Patterson. Those books hold little reread value for me. I am not willing to pay more for them. But I can see why Macmillan is tearing their hair out if they believe people will willingly shell out 14.99 to rent (and even DRM free ebooks to my mind fall under the term ‘rent’ and not ‘purchase’ because they are not readily transferable or archivable) one of these books.

By: J

Tue, 02 Feb 2010 13:40:53 +0000

Macmillan would like variable pricing. Some of those would be higher than 9.99, but some would be less. I’m certainly behind the idea that once a book reaches a certain age, the e-book should be the cost of a mass-market paperback or a bit less.

And this is me fondly remembering the cost of a mass market paperback being around 5 dollars. It still messes with my head when it’s nearly double that.

Though I actually would pay more for a hard-to-find OOP book. So maybe past a different certain age, the price starts to go up again!