New York, New York!
The highlights of my week in New York didn’t begin and end with seeing four musicals on Broadway. That was a major, to be sure, but not the reason I flew across the continent for the second time in a month (the first being the trip to Newfoundland with my husband in early June). I hadn’t been to an RWA National Conference in three years, so I was really looking forward to this one, and it did not disappoint.
On Tuesday, June 27th, I atttended The Golden Network Retreat, which was an all-day affair this year. Any RWA member who has finaled in the Golden Heart (unpublished manuscripts) contest, in the current year or any previous year, and who is a member of The Golden Network Chapter (ie. you must pay your dues) can attend the Retreat. I’ve attended three times, and each time has been more beneficial than the last. Honestly, I can’t remember what happened at the Retreat in 2007… Wait, just typing that brought back the memories. It was a Q&A session with agents and editors, but that was back before publishing took a nosedive. In 2008, it was another Q&A, and we were given the opportunity to do some speed-pitching. This year, it was another Q&A, featuring a morning and also an afternoon session. The same questions each session, but different agents and editors answering them.
The twist this year was that TGN members were to send in our questions a couple of months ago. Around April, if I remember correctly. They kept saying they needed questions, so I sent a few along (I won’t say which ones…ahem). At the time, the digital imprint from one of the “Big Six,” Avon Impulse, had just opened up and announced they would pay 25% on net royalties for the first 10,000 copies and 50% thereafter. So one of the questions sent in and asked of the panel was whether they thought 25% of net was “fair” to the writer. Well. The morning panel nearly didn’t want to answer the question. The afternoon panel did answer it, and the conversation became quite heated. The upshot was that agents didn’t think the 25% on net was fair, but editors (speaking for their houses, anyway) did. I also heard an editor say that ebooks should be priced the same as mass market paperbacks, which really surprised me. People who read ebooks are getting quite accustomed to paying below-mmpb prices, both because of on-line retailers like Amazon heavily discounting ebooks in effort to sell e-readers and because self-publishing (now usually termed “indie” publishing, because it’s easier to type, not being so many letters, plus it sounds cooler) has grown by leaps and bounds over the last year, and indie authors have learned that pricing books at $2.99 is the “sweet point” and that super-low pricing like .99 cents for a full-length novel might boost their sales (there’s also the argument that the super low pricing diminishes the value of the reading experience, but that’s a debate for another post). Authors who self-publish via Kindle at the $2.99 price point or higher earn 70% royalties, whereas authors who self-publish below $2.99 earn 35% royalties. So you can see why the question of 25% on net royalties being “fair” was asked by…someone.
At any rate, readers of ebooks have become accustomed to NOT paying the same as they would pay for a mass market paperback. I know I’m certainly not accustomed to paying the same for an ebook as I would a paperback, whether it’s mass market or trade pb. However, now publisher “agency pricing” has entered the picture, which means the publisher sets the price for their ebooks sold on places like Amazon. Amazon doesn’t set the pricing. And if the publisher decides their ebooks should be priced the same as their mass markets, then they will be. They are in control, not Amazon.
I understand the arguments about the publishers being in control of their own pricing, I just don’t understand the logic behind pricing ebooks the same as mass markets. Okay, if a publisher were to issue an ebook at the same time as the hardcover (hardcovers are usually released several months to a year before the mass market paperback), then I guess they could charge the same for the ebook as they would the mmpb. Because, well, if the mmpb isn’t available at the same time as the ebook, if only the ebook and a hardcover are available, then go for it. Price the ebook like you would the mmpb, then sit back and see what happens. But once the mmpb becomes available, or if a hardcover isn’t published at all (the vast majority of romance novels, which are either mmpb, trade pb or digital-first), then pricing the mmpb the same as the ebook…it just doesn’t make sense to me.
Isn’t the idea to sell more books, not less? Will the faithful reader pay the same for an ebook as a mmpb, even though she doesn’t have a paper copy to put on her bookshelf, lend to a friend, or sell to a used bookstore? I wouldn’t. I’d buy the mass market paperback because it’s more “tangible.” And I can take it into the bathtub.
Now, I love ebooks, and I love my Kindle. It’s very easy to order books, and for some reason I read them faster on my Kindle. But I don’t want to pay the same price as I would for a mass market or a trade paperback (and so far, I haven’t), because I don’t like jamming up my Kindle with books I’ve already read. I delete them (yes, even from the archive). It takes a lot for me to keep an ebook. But then it takes a lot for me to keep a paperback. I feel better about buying ebooks, because I’m not contributing to the landfill when I want to get rid of them, and I don’t have to stress about HOW I’m going to get rid of them without contributing to the landfill, either (I always feel a bit guilty recycling books, but I confess that I very often do). To my way of thinking, agency pricing is a way for publishers to protect their sales…but at what cost? How many readers will turn to self-published authors for the inexpensive reads they used to fulfill through waiting for the mass market to come out? How many readers will boycott authors published by traditional publishers because of agency pricing? Even though the trad-pubbed author has no control over the pricing? How many authors will be told by their houses that they aren’t selling, while ebook sales are going through the roof, but, weird, it’s the ebooks that are priced below mass market pbs that are selling like hotcakes. If the Big Six lowered their prices on ebooks, maybe those authors who “aren’t selling,” who are forced to take new names or who are simply just dropped from the house, might start selling—to the audience that has become accustomed to not paying the same for digital as they do for print.
Thoughts?
Hi, Cindy,
I do expect paperbacks to be more expensive than e-books. You’re not getting a physical entity. So I think the price should be less.
Hi Cindy,
As a self-pubbed author, I talk to a lot of other self-pubbed authors and Kindle readers, and there’s no way they want to pay the same for an ebook as they would for something they’d buy at B&N. And why should they? They’re getting great books to read at great prices, and I sell more books. It’s a win-win for everyone. My publisher put some of my backlist on Kindle at a higher price than what I sell my books for, and I have yet to see a dime from those sales. The $2.99 price that I set for my self-pubbed books seems to be what everyone wants. Anything higher, not so much.
Jacqueline and Nancy, thanks for chiming in. Nancy, I know self-pubbed authors who price their books at higher than $2.99, but I can’t recall anyone who prices above $3.99. Maybe I’ve heard of $4.99 at the highest, but that seems pretty high for an indie novel (only because of the high royalty rates). I’m in Canada, and a mass market can cost up to $10 here, even though the U.S. price is usually $2 cheaper and even though our dollar has been on par with the U.S. dollar for a very long time!
I can see ebooks from publishers being priced higher than self-published books (because of all the hands that dip into the book), but paying a mmpb price for an ebook just doesn’t make sense to me. Once (if) mmpbs no longer exist and it’s an ebook/trade/hardcover world, then, er, maybe. But the appeal of ebooks was partly the cheaper price. Even at $150, e-readers are not cheap, and they contribute to the garbage dump when folks upgrade (esp. if those folks don’t take old units to recycling centre or pass them on). So it’s not like ebooks (like any electronics–cell phones, computers) are greening the world. But the ebooks themselves are easy to dispense of once you’ve read them. That seems like something to promote. I know several readers who will definitely buy the paperback if there’s no monetary reward to them for buying the ebook. The convenience of the ebook doesn’t seem to outweigh that reward.
Great post, Cindy! Ebook pricing is certainly a hot topic for all of us. I posted a slightly different take on it last week on my blog. The Big 6 are discouraging e-book sales at exactly the point in history when the public is embracing e-books. Not a smart business move on their part. And if they do decide to lower their prices, their authors will earn even =less= money, since they’re only collecting 14.9% royalties on the cover price of those books. One more great reason to go indie.
Cindy – hi there, roomie, and wasn’t NYC fun? This is a great post.
Shelly, when you point out that “The Big 6 are discouraging e-book sales at exactly the point in history when the public is embracing e-books,” that’s absolutely an echo of what I’ve been thinking. My books from Kensington and Berkley are out in trade paper and e-book and my e-book sales haven’t been great – for erotic romance and sensual romance, which are supposed to be big sellers in e-format. I have to think it’s the price point. It’s almost as if the big publishers are trying to drive authors to self-publishing, but I can’t imagine why they’d want to do that. Personally, I love being with NYC publishers and having my books both in bricks-and-mortar stores and available electronically – but I’m disappointed that my readers have to pay so much for electronic format.
Looking at where the industry may be heading, I don’t think bookstores will die but I think they’ll become specialized and become lovely destination spots that host book clubs etc. and really know their customers and their inventory and provide personalized service – and I expect that we’ll be paying a premium for print books. Right now, it kind of seems the other way around – that it’s e-books that are overpriced (at least the ones from the traditional publishers).
Interesting times!
Great post, Cindy! And I completely agree with you. Now is the special moment that going indie and pricing at 2.99 really pays off! Actually I priced mine at 99 cents purely as a promotional ploy: it’s the first in a trilogy, therefore it makes sense. The next ones will be at 2.99…of course!
What I think though is that this is just one short WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY for indie authors. I just can’t believe that the Big 6 are so stupid that they will let the e-market escape from them! Once they’ve invested in their various paper editions, it costs them NOTHING to go digital! So one of them (or more) is bound to wake up some day soon and start offering good deals to their authors AND lower their e-book prices to compete with indies.
And once books from traditionally published authors can be found at the “sweet” 2.99 price point, just watch the indies disappear!
Well, thinking for myself of course, I do hope that won’t happen too soon. But I’m afraid it will sooner or later. The later the better!
Cindy, I heard much the same thing at the PAN Retreat. Agents basically telling publishers to get with the program, and publishers reacting defensively. One publisher rep asked the roomful of authors – many of them indie published – what Amazon gave them for their 70%. You could hear jaws dropping from around the room.
Hi Shelly,
I hear you on the Big 6 seeming to discourage ebooks at a point when the public seems to be embracing them, which seems odd. This is the time “traditionally published epub authors” (ie. not self-pubbed) have been waiting for–or so we thought. For ebooks to mushroom like they have over the last year. However, I can’t say that those of us who epubbed long ago expected royalty rates from the big publishers to compare with what a lot of small epublishers offer. We expected the NY houses would attempt to look after themselves, and that’s what they’re doing by having lower royalty rates and calling it “standard.” It’s standard for them, but not for epublishing.
The thing that plain ol’ knocks my socks off is the understanding I received at RWA that the big publishers don’t feel epublishing is gaining a good share of the market. I sat in on the first part of the PAN panel, and a couple of times I felt like they were telling the authors what they wanted us to believe, which has always worked well in the past. 🙂 But we’re not IN the past. We’re in the future.
I should add that it’s not so much they’re discouraging ebooks as they are trying to protect print books – discouraging ebooks with lower than standard royalty rates and pricing similar to mmpb is a way of protecting print books, which still play a major force in the market and can expose authors to readers she wouldn’t find just going ebook alone.
I am not against the big 6. I haven’t self-published to this point, although it’s becoming more and more tempting (I’m currently writing a short story series I plan to self-pub). I just feel sometimes that authors are banging our collective heads against a wall, because we see something in the emerging market that the big 6 either don’t or are waiting out to see how things settle.
Hi Susan, yes, it was great rooming with you, too. :::waving:::
Thanks for your thoughts. I, too, think it’s the price point that is keeping ebooks from NY houses from growing. I sat in on the Random House Spotlight where they mentioned the re-introduction of Loveswept as a digital-only line. They seem to be planning price points that ARE lower than mmpb, so maybe other big pubs will soon follow. I have no idea about the royalty structure, though, although I thought I heard that they do offer advances.
Susan, I don’t think the big pubs are trying to drive authors to self-publishing (although it has happened to some!). Like I said in another comment, IMO it’s more about protecting themselves. There are always more eager authors to fill slots when veterans have decided they’ve had enough and either (1) fade away (which is sad) or (2) turn to self-pubbing and discover their readers are still there waiting for them, despite what they’ve been told about their lousy sales, etc., at their former pubs.
I do think the sudden growth of ebooks took the industry by surprise. Before “The Rise of the Kindle,” authors often felt at the mercy of publishers. Now, established authors are turning to self-publishing and so are new authors. I tend to think a combination is the best approach, but I know previously unpublished authors who chose the indie route when it became apparent NYC didn’t want them, and those authors are doing very well. Now THEY no longer want NYC. They don’t want an agent, they don’t want a traditional house. They just want to write and feed their audience, and, hey, lookee here, make a living at it. 🙂
Hi Claude,
I agree with you about the .99 price point being for specials or for the first in a series, etc. From what I understand, that seems to work well for self-pubbed authors. Your comment about the short window of opportunity is interesting. It’s something I’ve been thinking about myself. NOW very well might be THE time for indie authors, because, let’s face it, a lot of not very good stuff is being put up along with great stuff. I don’t like reading 30 typos in a book, I don’t care if I paid .99 cents for it. And I have had that experience. OTOH, I have paid $2.99 for an indie book by a multi-pubbed NYC author who did everything herself, and the cover was great, the writing great, and not one typo! 🙂
That’s just me. Other readers don’t mind errors so much when they’re paying a low price.
I would hope royalties from the big six would go up for authors once they discover the “sweet point.” As a way to lure good authors. Or at least provide a sliding scale. Or something! If the big six began selling at prices like $2.99 or even $3.99, yes, ebook readers might then hop all over them, because those authors would have the benefit of covers, marketing, and editing without having to farm it all out themselves – more time for the actual writing! And the readers would reap the benefit of reading authors who didn’t have to spend tons of time on promotion, etc., and instead write (some indie authors I know spend 40-60 hours a week trying to get their numbers up instead of writing new books, and they’re getting tired).
Now that indie is here, though, I don’t know that it will ever disappear. Because there are so many authors, some previously published through NYC – some multiple times, and some winners of major awards – who have just become discouraged by NYC publishing. They don’t fit the niche. Getting told that for a decade or two CAN be discouraging. And if you’ve found an audience in self-pubbing and NYC still doesn’t want you (the generic you, not YOU, Claude), then your readers will still be waiting to buy you indie.
Of course, if the 70% advantage suddenly went bye-bye, like some fear it will, then it will be a whole ‘nother ball of wax. New, muddy waters to wade through and all that.
Hi Vanessa,
At least agents are telling publishers to get with the program, but if publishers don’t, what can agents do? Just keep beating their heads against that wall until pubs get it? Maybe.
I wish I could have returned to the PAN panel after the 30-minute break. But by then I needed to be somewhere else. We wanted to ask our questions during the points of discussion, not 30 minutes later.