Categories: News • The Link-O-Lator
Tags: This entry has not been tagged yet.
by SB Sarah • Tuesday, April 24, 2007 at 06:29 AM
One of my biggest pet peeves are publications that demand an additional online subscription when you’ve already subscribed to the paper version of the magazine or paper. And since some of the publications have proprietary content that isn’t reproduced anywhere else, it’s harder to link to and discuss the details of an article. Grrr. Make me do more work, why don’t you!? Humph. Fine.
In this week’s Crain’s New York Business, there’s an article about publishers releasing books straight to paperback and skipping the hardcover issue in an attempt to “target young, cost-conscious buyers.” The article by Matthew Flamm profiles a few books that likely would have followed the hardback-to-paperback sequence, except that rival publishing houses have had success issuing books straight to paperback:
Though it doesn’t work for every title, and the economics of paperbacks hurt agents and authors, publishers and booksellers see the lower-price format as one way to reach new readers.... First novels, translated fiction, and literary nonfiction have suffered most in a media landscape packed with choices. With a standard hardcover price of $25.00, these books barely stand a chance.
I guess I think it’s all to the good if the “establishment” has to rethink the HB = “serious” and “good” and PB = crap ideology that’s been entrenched for sooooo long.
Personally, I only buy things in HB that I know I’ll read more than once (and the vast majority of books simply don’t qualify).
The thing that’s always amused me is that academic books are almost always released in hardcover, because that’s what libraries prefer and if you’ve only got a print run of 500 copies, and it costs $60+, you’re mostly selling to academic libraries. You know you’ve “arrived” as an academic when you’re released in paperback for the general anxious graduate student and professor who wants to OWN your book b/c it’s that important. In romances, you’re generally released in paperback and you know you’ve “arrived” when you’re finally released in hardcover. So my two book-buying areas are the complete opposite of each other.
However, I like that my field (Jane Austen) is popular enough with the educated and interested populace that most of the books come out in paperback!
Jennie said on...If they truly want to go after the “younger and more cost-conscious” people, they’ve got to move to a digital format. Simply put, it’s how this generation lives. Why buy a complete album when all you want is one song and can get it for .99 at itunes?
Our library has had huge success with the audiobook digital download program. You can download it right from your computer & away you go. Much simpler than borrowing audio CDs from the library.
I know we’ve had the e-book debate before, but this generation has the potential to be the group that brings e-books further into the mainstream.
Personally, if an author publishes in hardcover I borrow it from the public library.
Without having read the article, it sounds to me like it’s speaking from a position somewhere in literary/mainstream fiction, rather than genre. As you say, romance is a mostly paperback market, and over in my territory, it’s a big deal when you get stepped up to a hardcover release. (Or even trade paper, which will be happening with my third novel next year; that constituted exciting enough news to have me bouncing around the house for a while.) To have a first novel in hardcover is a big deal over here.
I’ve read other articles about this phenomenon, though, one which covered Naomi Novik, i.e. took some notice of genre. While it’s true that the royalty terms for hardcovers are more favorable, they aren’t so favorable that selling three thousand of those is better than selling thirty thousand paperbacks. The bigger issue is that (mass-market) paperbacks don’t get official notice; most trade publications and reviewers focus on hardcovers and trade papers. It takes a fairly substantial promotional push, I think, to get that section of the industry to pay attention to a mass-market release. On the other hand, if you’ve got a commercial enough title on hand, screw the trade publications; accessibility is the better route for you to go.
In other words, it’s a complicated situation affected by several factors, and so this “trend” isn’t going to be applied wholesale any time soon, but rather to the books for which it makes sense.
As a younger romance reader, I admit when a book of one of my favorite author comes out, I think twice before I buy it.
I understand that as a romance author, if your books comes out is published in hardcover it means that you’ve finally arrived, but what does that mean for all of us who’s been a loyal fan for years and now can’t really afford their hardcover books?
To me personally, it feels too much like betrayal. Yes they have ‘arrived’, but that actually means that a considerable amount of people buy the book, right? So why the hardcover? Are they not making enough money already? Seems like highway robery.
Do I have it twisted, or does the 1st and basic law of economy still stands as such, “Demand goes up, price goes down.”?
said on...~To me personally, it feels too much like betrayal.~
I hear this from time to time, and can never understand it. Who is betraying you? The book would be available from the library if you can’t afford or don’t want to spend the hardcover price. It will be available in paperback within the year--and very likely available at a used book store well before that.
How is it a betrayal for an author to want to build her career, maintain it, make her living?
I publish in hard/soft and in paperback originals. That’s my choice. My career, my life, my living.
Sorry, hot button for me.
I’m always baffled, too, when I hear the comment `don’t they make enough money.’ Whatever any author makes is really her business. And isn’t the issue for the reader. The reader reads--buys, borrows, hardcover, paper, trade, new, used. I feel strongly it isn’t my business where the reader obtains the book. I don’t feel betrayed by the reader who borrows the book from the library or their neighbor, or who shops used. Why should the reader feel betrayed when an author moves from paperback originals to hard/soft?
said on...I’m poor, so hardback purchases for my own collection are pretty much a guaranteed “No.” (Yes, there are exceptions to the rule, but those are few and far between.)
As a librarian I prefer hardbacks for the simple fact that they are sturdier and can handle circulation better. And when an author (particularly a romance author) is big enough to warrant a hardback, their are going to be in pretty heavy rotation.
said on...I’ve never viewed being published in hardback as a betrayal. I’ve never even heard that. How the are authors betraying you by writing such exemplary stories that people would actually like to purchase them in a sturdier, longer lasting format?
Am I missing something?
said on...It’s not cost, it’s quality.
Most of my disposable income goes towards books (Gen Y here). Romance wise, I rarely purchase any hardcover novels anymore. It’s not because of the price (though it doesn’t hurt) but many romantic series, by the time they’ve hit hardcover, are so drawn out. Yeesh.
Like Jennie said, e-books might be fun but I’m waiting for Apple to release an ebook reader. An ebook reader with the organization skills and ease of use of an iPod? Sign me up. Like yesterday. Publishers would have to be committed to capping the prices at $10.00 or something similar as oppose to just pocketing the savings from switching to digital format.
Why not do as Mark Cuban suggests for the movie industry for the publishing industry? Release all versions - the paperback, the hardcover, the digital, and the audio - at the same time. Let the buyers decide. I think publishers will find it’s not solely a question of cost. People read books in different ways.
One quick aside on the logic of iTunes—for me and my friends, it’s not that we’re anti-album. We’re anti bad albums. I like full albums of excellent musicians who’ve taken time to produce an even, gorgeous work. But pop music? Where it’s a new album every 11 months? It’s almost guaranteed to be bad. That’s why there’s ripping of individual songs as oppose to full albums. I’m not sure the music industry ever understood that. If we’re only sold disposable items, of course that’s what we’ll buy.
In general, I hate hardbacks and will only buy them from a few authors: Nora Roberts, Diana Gabaldon, and JK Rowling. My peeves with hardbacks are numerous: the cost, the size, the heft of the book, the relative cumbersomeness of it, the dust-jackets. Heck, even the thickness of the paper drives me nuts. Barnes & Noble regularly has hardcover books by popular authors in the bargain bins for $5.98—cheaper than a MM paperback—and I won’t buy those, either. I simply hate hardbacks. But what annoys me MOST about hardbacks is when an author makes the switch to hardback in the middle of a series. That always makes me feel a bit abused.
I would love to see publishers do as someone suggested and release the book in all its formats at the same time and let the reader choose.
I’ve never heard the concept that “it’s a betrayal” if the author is published in hardback, which is accepted to be the most respected format.
I grew up without any money for books, so my feeling has always been that a book is a treat, not that it was owed to me in the way I specified. I love mass markets because I could buy them used for a few quarters. I went to the library for harbacks or borrowed them from friends.
I love hardbacks when they are printed on good paper with a clear, attractive font. The book itself is a thing of beauty.
I love trade paper because the quality is nicer than mass market, the layout better.
If I want a book, I’ll buy it in whatever format. If it’s too expensive in hardback, then I’ll wait for the paperback release. I am not “owed” anything from the author. With my favorite authors, I get back far more than the dollars I pay for the works they’ve crafted.
The downside of getting published in hardback is that those books only have a few weeks on the shelves of bookstores. If they don’t sell well, they’re gone faster than the paperbacks.
I am happy to have my novels published in trade paper, and I’ll also be happy when they’re re-released in mass market.
Currently I’m a relatively rich bastard (I hope I have the luck for it to stay that way given my expansive novel buying habits) and furthermore a relatively rich bastard who earns his money in GBP rather USD so stuff—including books—priced in USD is *cheap* at the moment. However the prime criterion for which format of a book is first ‘How quickly can I get it in my hot little hands?’ _then_ comes price.
That generally means e-book is preferred, because it arrives at the speed of a few clicks and a download, even when it’s at a hardback price (which they sometimes, a bit oddly, are). From decision to buy to having the book == a few seconds.
Hardbacks will give me a bit of a check on price, tho’ I do feel I’m getting value for that higher price, given that they’re slower to arrive in my hands. They’re definitely more durable than paperbacks and are a nicer object to have, tho’ take up a bunch of space.
Mass-Market Paperbacks, are a good price, and are a standardised size that works well for me and fits in my hands and on my shelving. Unfortunately like hardbacks they don’t arrive at the speed of download. Also one might not be available if there’s a hardback or a trade issue of the title.
I hate, hate, hate, Trade Paperbacks, and if there is an alternative format, I’ll avoid them. There appears to be no consistent sizing for the darn things, they cost a big chunk more than a mass market for a quality advantage that’s not enough for me to be interested in—indeed being oversized they make my wrists ache—and they don’t arrive any quicker to me than the other non-electronic formats.
Die trade paperback, die!
I guess for me ebook->mmp->hardback----->trade(ugh!)
...
Tho’ I think ‘betrayal’ is rather strong, I think I do know where those who are, shall we say, ‘disappointed’ when they find out that their favorite authors’ next books are going hardback, are coming from. It’s the ‘How quickly can I get it in my hot little hands?’ question again, only with the budget constraints of not being a comparitively rich bastard.
The greatly anticipated book has been written, edited, proofed, typeset, copyedited, designed etc. It’s almost existing as an actual artifact in the world. Yay! But, oh noes, it’s now announced it’s not going to exist at a price you can afford to pay anytime soon.
The actually available hardback version, that you *can’t afford*, is therefore just a thing that sits there, cruelly mocking you with the knowledge that it sucks to be modest means of you, for six months to a year whilst you wait for the mass market paperback that they could have just have easily been published instead of the hardback.
If the hardback and mass market were releases were simultaneous, I don’t think authors would get that sort of reaction.
said on...I buy & read alot of books (5-6 week). There are very few authors I buy in hardback (I could name them on one hand). For all the other authors released in hardback, I go to the library. A really good title I will purchase later in paperback.
In my opinion, if you want to sell more books and/or get your name out...go for paperback. Cost IS a consideration for most readers, and if more use the library...less money for author, fewer recomendations from readers, and fewer used books bouncing around attracting new fans.
I often shop Tuesday mornings for new releases. I arrive with a list & attempt to avoid impulse buying. For publishers & authors that hope I will purchase their product...make it paperback or you’re SOL. All new authors, good (not excellent) authors, and previously good authors who might be flaking out...I save my money and hit the library.
Bye...I’m off to the bookstore. Kalen, your book is on my watch list, maybe somebody has it out early?
Since people are mentioning hating trade papers, I’ll weigh in on that, and why I was excited to be told they’ll be publishing Midnight Never Come in that format.
I agree that to me, they often seem like a bad compromise between hardcover and mass-market: not as cheap as the latter, not as durable as the former, and of highly variable size, which makes shelving an irritation.
On the other hand, when I pitched the idea of Midnight Never Come to my editor, secretly I was thinking that it just didn’t look like a mass-market book in my head. I can’t explain what I mean by that—it was something more than just a feeling that it deserved the attention bigger formats get—but I kept imagining it as a hardcover, and then telling myself that as such a new author, I was unlikely to see that happen. So when my editor suggested trade paper, I was gleeful.
Some people really like trade papers; they’re more “elegant” in cultural terms, and frequently are higher-quality in their physical production than mass-markets are. Some people really hate them. Some people don’t care. I like the fact that it’s frequently SOP in fantasy for trades to be re-released as mass-market, so people who would rather have Midnight Never Come in that format can still have it. Seems like a good compromise to me.
I see a heck of a lot of hardcovers on the remainder table at bookstores. I’d rather expose myself (heh) to 100 new paperback readers than sell to ten hardcover readers. The paperback readers will be more likely to come back for more.
There was a much ballyhooed hardcover romance debut a few years back. I bought the book and felt robbed when I finished it. I had no interest in ever buying a book by this author again. However, had I read her first novel as a $6.99 paperback I might have said “meh”, but been willing to take a chance on her again. After all, I was only out $7.00 vs. $25.00.
SF has dealt with this issue for years, so much so that the prestigious Phillip K. Dick award is given to books whose original format is paper. I wouldn’t say no to a hardcover run of my books, but I’d just as soon get more paper or ebook copies into the hands of more readers.
said on...My favorite bookstore is Goodwill :)
If it’s a book for pleasure reading, it’ll probably be in paperback, unless I find a HB at le Goodwill.
If it’s a book I’ll use a lot--- ie, cookbook, referrence book, teaching tool etc, or something I’ll lend to students, then I go for hardback.
Like others have said, I can read a book a day, I have other activities and obligations, so cheapest is the way I go.
IMO the bottom line (I would probably flunk marketing)...I consider every time a book is checked out of the library to be a lost opportunity for a sale of the book. When I check out a new Charlaine Harris, or Jim Butcher release in hardback...I probably would have purchased the book in paperback IF it was available at the time...LOST SALES OPPORTUNITY folks.
Those are my known authors, not some newbie I’m checking out like Patrick Rothfuss...it was OK, I will probably read his next book. But it’s not good enough to purchase in hardback nor good enough to purchase the paperback after I read the library hardback. On the other hand newbie Rob Thurman was released in paperback, which I bought on impulse the week it was released. Then waited impatiently an entire year for the second release so I could purchase it immediately. One author has my money the other doesn’t...go figure.
Wow, dl, we must have been separated at birth! I’m currently reading Moonshine by Thurman and I’ve got the Rothfuss book on reserve at the library.[g]
Wow, what strong reaction for having a little opinion.
With all due respect, Ms Roberts, I live in Asia, in a 3rd world country. Our libraries do not carry romance books, nor any popular books for that matter. Books are a luxury. Not many read English, and since English books are really quite expensive, most do not lend them to anyone. I myself don’t. We don’t have many used book stores here. Ones that I’ve visited, doesn’t sell popular books, mostly molding 20-year old ones.
I’m trying very hard to not let temper run, but how you earn your money is not a reader’s business? How so? Who buys the books? Your living yes, OUR money.
If there was a choice to buy the paperback and hardcover at the same time, I would gladly take back whatever I said that offended anyone.
As I read my comment again, I must point out that the whole point of my comment was this line: “What does that mean for all of us who’s been a loyal fan for years and now can’t really afford their hardcover books?”
Give us a choice which format to buy.
This is just an opinion from a loyal buyer/reader of romance books, just my honest, very polite expression of an opinion, and I got a lashing from one of the best selling author in romance. My mom is going to squee.
You may not feel betrayed when readers borrow/buy used, but why should we feel vice versa to that? Are we not allowed to be contrary here? To have a different opinion? To be unfortunate enough that we can’t afford most hardcovers, adn saying something about it?
I still can’t wrap my mind around how I warrant such harsh lashing from THE Nora Roberts.
While I don’t see it as a “betrayal” when an author moves to hardcover, it can certainly be a “frustration”.
For me, much as I wish it was different, it’s all about money (or more accurately, lack of it). I simply cannot afford to buy hardcovers very often, whether I would like to or not.
I have two authors I autobuy in hardcover, both to get the book as soon as possible to to match their other hardcovers on my shelf. (As an aside, there’s no way I’m going to pay hardcover price for an ebook - if I spend that much money, I want something solid and pretty to hold in my hands.) I have two or three other authors I’ll consider on a book to book basis.
But if one of my “average” authors moves to hardcover, the cost is going to stop me following her and s/he is going to miss out on a sale to me.
My current case of this is Christine Feehan. I cringe to admit it, but I keep buying her Carpathian books. It’s like a bad, bad, bad addiction where each time I swear that is the last. Then a new one comes along and I just can’t help myself. I read it, really enjoy a few bits here and there (usually back story), grimace about significant parts of the rest and swear this is the last time. Rinse and repeat.
But she’s gone to hardcover with that series now. There’s no way I’m spending hardcover money on a bad addiction book. If my library gets it (New Zealand libraries are starting to get in more US books now, so I might get lucky) then I’ll borrow it and get my fix that way.
Now usually, if I borrow a hardcover and really like it, I’ll buy the mass market when it comes out, so the author still gets at least some of my money. But for an average book like this, if I’ve got my fix I may well decide I don’t need it again. So Feehan (to continue my example) actually totally loses a sale from me by going to hardcover. Of course, little old me by myself with a big selling author, she’s not going to care. But if there are enough people out there like me, it might actually make a noticeable impact. (Although probably not.)
Not even sure if I have any kind of major point here, just a personal observation of the “moving to hardcover” thing (and an embarrassing revelation about my reading habits).
<>
Oh, absolutely. I currently have “Simply Magic” (Mary Balogh) at home, borrowed from the library. I also have “Forever in Blue” (Ann Brashares), borrowed from the bookstore where I work—nice perk, that. But those are both books I would have happily purchased had they been released in paperback. I’m interested enough to read them when they are first published, but by the time they make it to paperback, either I’m no longer interested or maybe I just overlook them.
Ha!
Don’t feel bad Kerry-- Feehan is my secret vice too.
The only thing that comes to mind is the remark that the books don’t get ‘better’ even though they go to hardback and cost more.
Even some have said that often the quality gets worse. I can think of a few cases where that seems to be true, and a few others where the books have stayed consistantly good even after the transition.
Again, the ONLY books I buy new in hardbook are those that will be used a lot--- as reference, professional, lending out, reading repeatedly etc. Otherwise, I go used or paperback.
I have other addictions that require money too ;)
<
I won’t buy romance in trade. I’ve noticed that my B&N has a ton of new trade-sized romances, but I automatically skip right past them. $7.99 is enough, publishers. Quit gouging me. Oh...and is it just me, or is erotica beginning to flood the market in trade size primarily?
Speaking of trade, though… Has anyone noticed that “fiction” trades often have matte covers and “romance” trades continue to have the glossy covers? It has occurred to me that maybe this is another “distinction” the publishers make between “serious” fiction and “genre” fiction.
Nidrah--one of the reasons you’re seeing more trade paperbacks is small publishers (like mine) cannot afford to print mass market size paperbacks. It’s substantially more cost effective to do trade paperbacks. So many of the new authors in print coming from Ellora’s Cave, Amber Quill Press and others can only be found in ebook or trade paperback.
I wish my books were in mass market sized editions, but I’m glad I can offer a choice of the less expensive ebook or print.
Oh, thanks, Darlene! That’s very interesting. I had no idea. My assumption would be: books cost more to buy because they cost more to produce. And since MM PBs cost less to buy, I would assume that they cost less to produce. So that’s why I’ve felt like the publishers were “gouging” when they automatically went for the trade size. Does that make sense?
Yes, Nidrah, it does. I often get that vibe from folks when I’m doing a booksigning. I’d like to offer an explanatory note saying, “Honest, if I could make them smaller and more affordable I would...” but that’s not an option.[g]
I was pitching my books at a signing Sunday as great Mother’s Day gifts ("C’mon, you know you’re wondering what you’re going to get her this year! She doesn’t have a hot pirate romance signed by the author!") and having the trade paperback editions did look more “giftable” than mass market editions. So maybe it all works out.
I’ve never felt “betrayed” by authors who make it to hardcover - actually, I’m kinda glad, because HARDCOVERS you can order from the library whereas paperbacks (because of their “flimsy” nature) are never registered in their databases.
Michelle said on...I don’t get the betrayal part either. If you don’t want to buy the HB then don’t, borrow it from the library. I am excited when a favorite author goes HB. The writers deserve the respect that goes along with getting HB status. To me the readers that complain just come off as whiny and selfish.
said on...I definitely prefer buying MM paperback, since my book collection is 800+ and out of control. But...when I found out that Kelley Armstrong’s new book is going to be published in HB, I was...oddly proud of her, given that I don’t even know her personally. And I can’t wait to buy it, to support one of my favorite authors.
However, every time I see my Laurell K. Hamilton HBs on the chelf, I want to cringe.
I’m not sure authors realize just how difficult it can be to get English books by popular authors outside the US. We certainly don’t library or used bookstore options here in Mexico.
Only one bookstore carries a significant number of English titles, and it’s all the way across the city. I’ve also found a chain called Libreria Porrua who says if the book is printed later than 2003 and they deal with the distributor, they can make special orders for me. I don’t know what kind of special import fees that involves, however.
The simplest way for me to get books is through Amazon, but hardcovers, in addition to being more expensive by cover price, weigh a great deal more in shipping as well. It just doesn’t make economic sense to buy a hardcover when I could get four paperbacks for the same cost. I’ve taken to scouring Ebay and just buying job lots of books people have finished reading. I hate doing that because (a)I don’t want to gyp an author out of royalties and (b) I’m rather a persnickety reader who prefers an untouched book. Regardless, I just bought a crate of 77 suspense novels for a total of $61, including postage. I’m considering starting my own used bookstore here in Mexico City at the rate I’m going.
On a tangent, if the book-buying market is skewing younger—that’s a very, very good thing! It means aliteracy is not taking over as has been feared. An older-skewing market would mean younger people don’t have a taste for recreational reading and thus likely won’t be buying books much at all as they get older and have more income.
said on...I hate HCs. I am young and thus I have moved from home to dorm to dorm to dorm to Rome to dorm to home (and home for the summer, of course) so heavy hardcovers are obnoxious. I only ever buy them for class or second hand. I admit, too, that it bothers me, for instance, that I own a bunch of Stephanie Plum books, and there are two hardcovers in the bunch. They don’t match, even though they are a series. Argh.
I like trade paperbacks; I think they are elegant. That said, I only buy them when they are $.50 at the second-hand store. $14 is bull for paperback.
Yay for 6.99/7.99 paperbacks! I will buy those unread. I will buy those that I borrow from friends or the library, so that I have a copy for myself. I would never for any other type of publishing.
You would think with all the moving I would like e-books, but they make me sad. I like feeling like I am getting something for my money- even though I get that I am getting the same words for the same amount of money, it doesn’t feel like they are REAL.
I totally get the betrayal idea. Sherilyn Kenyon has started releasing her Dark-Hunter series hard/soft, around the same time her books became more and more stupid. I purchased all her books new after borrowing them from a friend, and then she goes and phones in hardcovers? Seriously, what a bitch.
I do not agree that it’s a betrayal, but then I don’t think an author owes anyone anything. S/he writes.
Conversely, the reader buys or not the books.
I can ill afford hardbacks myself (though there are a couple of authors I can’t resist), and even new paperbacks are something I have to budget for. So it behooves me to be careful how I spend what book money I have, and voice my preferences with my wallet.
Aside to Ana: an English UBS in Mexico City? Most excellent idea! Have you tried the streets of Justo Celes and Donceles, down in the old Centro? [behind the Cathedral] While it’s true that most of the offerings are in Spanish, there’s the occasional English paperback tossed in. Caveat: consider this a full day excursion and keep a firm grip on your purse! Best of luck.
said on...I’m beginning to suspect that many writers don’t even realize they have a market outside of North America and perhaps Britain, or that releasing books in hardcover first makes it almost impossible for readers in other countries to access their writing.
I’m also a bit surprised at the assumption that everyone has a public library close by. Many people even in North America don’t, let alone in countries where half the population doesn’t even have clean drinking water.
Charlene--this is one of the beauties of ebooks. If you’re anywhere in the world with a computer, a credit card and an internet connection, you can download ebooks for a fraction of the cost of a hardcover.
Naturally, not everyone will be able to take advantage of this, but it does bring authors closer to their potential world wide audience.
said on...I still can’t wrap my mind around how I warrant such harsh lashing from THE Nora Roberts.
Bimbo, if you think that was harsh, then you obviously haven’t been in Roamnceland for very long.
The point is, if you can’t afford to buy hard back, then don’t. Seriously. I certainly don’t, unless I reallly want the book.
And the whole third world country thing? Methinks that was a little unnecessary, and kinda negates anything else you have to say on the matter. That kinda shit’s great at stopping discussions dead, because people don’t know how to respond, or are afraid to respond, for fear that they come off as unsympathetic.
Just sayin.
said on...When we all moved into our dorms for the very first time last September, I saw a lot of girls toting futons and big-screen TVs up the stairs. I had a bundle of blankets, a couple of suitcases full of clothes, my action figures (wrapped in tissue paper, naturally) and six big boxes of books.
I’m poor, and I don’t have much space. I prefer paperbacks simply because they’re easy to take care of and cheap; as a Terry Pratchett devotee, I have about thirty of his books, and the paperbacks are all regulation size and can be easily packed into a box for shipping. Six or seven bucks for three hundred delicious pages is not a bad trade in my opinion, and they have a high rereadability factor. All of Pratchett’s books come out first in hardcover, then get reissued about six months later in paperback, which is a pain but something I can live with.
Currently, I have both paperbacks and hardbacks on my shelf. Oddly enough, the paperbacks are the only ones I really wanted; the hardbacks are all fodder from the $2 bin at the college bookstore, when I was desperate for something new to read. The rule of my bookshelf is as follows: size and rigidity of the book is inversely proportional to the amount of time I want to spend with it.
I do dislike it when the authors make the complete switch to hardcover, especially when it’s a series I’m marginally fond of. A lot of authors lose markets by making their books less accessible this way, especially to those of us on the student end of the spectrum. Issue in hardcover all you like, but please don’t neglect the softcover releases. Those are the ones that get us through the days and weeks.
I’m noticing a certain confusion here that somebody should clear up.
Authors do not decide what format their books will be published in. Publishers do. And while authors can maybe negotiate that point, ultimately, they’re not the ones making the decision.
Regarding other countries, it depends on what rights the author sold: world, world English, North American, or whatever. If they sold world rights, then that is the end of their ability to influence how it ends up in other countries. If they sold North American rights, by contrast, then they’re dependent on foreign agents to negotiate good translation deals with foreign publishers. If you’re reading the English version of a book in Thailand or Mexico or Russia? Then I can’t begin to guess at the distribution path that led to it being there, but it means they’re getting it from an English-language publisher, who isn’t aiming at that market anyway.
In other words, don’t rag on the author for the availability of their books in other countries. Unless they were able to sell translation rights there, they probably have jack in the way of influence over its availability.
Likewise for questions of format, though to a lesser extent, since an author can try to affect that one. I agree that it’s irritating to see a series jump format halfway through, but if a publisher thinks that’s a good idea, the author will likely go along with it. Arguments with the marketing department aren’t wise.
said on...I just love books. Mass market, trade, HC; I don’t care. I’m addicted, and I will snort it, inject it, or eat it. If I had to pick a favorite format, I would choose trade. Not as heavy as HC (in the bathtub) and more sturdy than mass market.
I get my HCs from amazon; the prices are cheaper (I just bought a HC for $14), and then I order $25+ and get free shipping. And I don’t have to pay sales tax either. I can usually get a hardcover and a couple of mass market paperbacks at the same cost of going to the bookstore and shelling out the $25-$27 (plus tax).
I don’t think publishers should stop making HCs. I am a librarian, and paperbacks don’t hold up very well. Perhaps publishers could trend away from HCs for the consumer market, but offer HC library editions?
Karen,
you are right, I have read romance for a long time, but I’ve only started going around the net for infos only for the last year, and started posting only a very short time ago. To me that was harsh, but if some think I’m just being a mite sensitive, well actually I don’t know what to say, I guess some things offends some and others not so much?
I am not looking for sympathy by that 3rd world country shit, I did not grow up poor nor hungry, I’ve always had clean water to drink and shower. Hey, I even speak English. I was just pointing out the accurate fact that in my country, and several others that are my neighbors, books are really such a luxury. And we get disapointed to say the least, when we have to wait a year to read our favorite books because we couldn’t really afford the hardcovers.
I will appreciate any kinds of disagreements to my opinion, 3rd world country shit notwithstanding. I see the discussion went along just fine, with participants stating that even some in the U.S do not have the same priviledges many does. Please do not be afraid to respond just because I come from a more unfortunate place than America - I’m at peace with the conditions in my country.
All in all, just stating the fact that we outside the continent may not have libraries or 2nd hand bookstores that caters popular books, so could writers please let us have a choice of what kind of format books to buy, by releasing HC and paperbacks at the same time. I get the point of quality from HC, I own several and I do not regret buying them. But most authors produce a book, what, every 6/8months? We wait for at least 6months before we can afford them in paperback. I hope you understand my frustration here. Can’t afford HC, then don’t buy it? I’m not complaining about that, just the waiting.
Marie, I just wanted to say that I totally get that authors have little or no control over book format or international distribution. I realise in retrospect that my post probably dind’t show that. In a way, I think this makes the whole situation more frustrating. It’s the author that loses out when we can’t get books or decide we can’t pay hardcover prices, when s/he doesn’t make the decisions that lead to that.
Ha, authenticatin word = southern35. Oh yeah, New Zealand is WAY southern. :)
said on...I do prefer my books to be HB. I think they’re put together better, last far longer and can be repaired much more easily if necessary, but like others here, I can’t afford the exorbitant prices the booksellers charge these days. So I just wait a while and get the HBs from Half Price Books or used from people on Amazon. Maybe they aren’t as bright and shiny new as they would’ve been if I’d bought them fresh off the presses, but so long as they aren’t seriously damaged, I’m more interested in the content than how glossy the cover is.
katieM said on...I had no idea that American books were offered in stores anywhere other than America and Western Europe.
All the complaints about the costs of hardcovers make me think that people want authors to stay in a certain niche (i.e. poor) and never move up the ladder. America (meaning the USA, Canada, and Mexico) is a capitalistic society. Companies operate to make money. Published authors write because they enjoy it, but also to make a living. Unpublished authors want to make a living at it. Its not selfish to want to do better for yourself, but it is selfish to want others to do poorly so that you can be entertained.
As one of the old SBs around here, I’d like to add that us Baby Boomers are not spring chickens anymore- holding a heavy hardcover book for any length of time just plain HURTS! And I KNOW I’m not alone with that.
So, yeah, we might have more disposable income and can easily afford hardcovers, but I know I have to make a decision every time an author I like starts releasing in hardcover- are they worth it? Do I REALLY care if I have to wait for the paperback?
So, actually I end up buying LESS books because of the hardcover releases. There’s just not that many authors that are worth the extra cost or physical discomfort. And buying a new author on “spec” just doesn’t happen with hardcovers. Although, if I have a big enough coupon, I MIGHT buy a hardback that I would normally not have paid full price for.
And I agree with some of the others, why not release in print, ebook, and audio at one time. Although, I consider the practice of pricing digital formats at the same price as print to be a blatent rip-off. The digital costs are minimal compared to print, so each sale is nearly pure profit.
Also, by releasing in all three formats, you’ve reached a broader range of consumers. Those who want hardcovers will get them, while those that prefer digital or can’t afford hardcovers will not become lost sales.
BevL (QB)
KatieM said:
but it is selfish to want others to do poorly so that you can be entertained.
How does “impractical and expensive” translate to “wanting others to do poorly?” In my opinion, that’s an erroneous logical leap. I don’t begrudge success that leads to hardcover publication, but it is my right as a consumer to decide what purchases make sense, just as it is the author’s right to make whatever deals are best for her career.
Personally, I do not care what they pack those stories into as long as they publish em.
And if it is hardcover so be I hope to betray as many readers as possible.
I’ll even take negative attention.
Can I go Gay to paperback?
said on...*rubs hands together* Now this is a discussion I can sink my teeth into. I’ve had strong opinions on this one for quite some time. And there are a couple of points that haven’t been made yet.
For my personal enjoyment I would rather have a book in mass-market paperback for one good reason, I’m a bed reader. Most of the reading I do is while I’m getting ready to fall asleep, not all, but most. Hardbacks are ok to read this way, but usually get heavy. I tend to read looonnnnggg hardback books. Trade paperbacks, at least the ones I’ve purchased, tend to flop around a bit too much. It makes it harder to hold the book while you are reading. The mass-markets hold their shape and are easier to hold in one hand. This doesn’t have anything to do with price or format, so much as convenience.
They also fit in a purse easier, ever tried to lug around a JK Rowling book? Those tomes are heavy!
Now, that being said if a new book is coming out and it is a must-have I will purchase it in whatever format it comes in. If it is something that I want to read but not purchase, I will request it at the library. I’m exceedingly lucky in that my local library is well stocked with almost everything I want to read. I may be 150 down the list, but they usually purchase enough copies that I get the book relatively quickly. They list everything, including paperbacks and you can request those as well. If it is something I find I love, I’ll wait and purchase a copy for myself in paperback.
If I find I can’t wait, I have been known to sit in the bookstore and read the book. I did this with the last Charlaine Harris book. Those hardbacks are tiny compared to most and still have a $25 price tag. So I sat and read Sookie’s latest adventure and never left the store. I felt really stupid when I started crying over the book and didn’t have a tissue. Do you know how hard it is to hide tears in a bookstore? Ack! When it came out in paperback I purchased it.
I find it interesting that no one has brought up the new mass-market size that was trialed last year. Christine Feehan had one of her’s issued in that format, and I found I hated it more than a hardback. It was hard to keep it open, unless you used two hands and it really doesn’t fit in with anything I have. If you are reading them in bed they tend to twist and don’t stay open. The publishers tried to sell them as easier for aging baby boomers to read, since the font was a bigger size. It was marginally larger but not enough to matter. I was so annoyed with that one I wrote the publisher, something I had never done before.
I’m happy if authors have moved up to the more enviable hardbacks, but unless it is a do or die situation I won’t buy them. I wait until it comes out in paperback.
I do have sympathy for others who live outside of the US. I’m a member of a group that has members in the UK, Canada, Puerto Rico, Portugal, France, South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand. I regularly hear how hard it is for them to get books and the cost involved. They rely on recommendations from people they trust before trying anything new simply because of the cost involved. I never really realized how hard it can be to find books. It’s something I think those of us in the US really take for granted.
Sorry I got so long winded on this.
Qadesh - a huge YES to everything you’ve just said.
I buy my handbags based on the requirement that they fit a mass market paperback. Make the books bigger and it gets so hard to carry my reading fix around with me.
said on...I’ll admit, over the years, to have a mild feeling of “betrayal” when a favored author’s books switch from MMP to trade- or hard-back. And, when forced to think about it, I guess I’d say it was because my purchases helped them to gain enough popularity to price me out of their immediate releases market.
Yep, I can wait a year. And yes, like many others have said here, by then, I’ve probably read the book from the library and forgotten to buy myself a copy when the MMP comes out.
Does that mean I don’t think authors shouldn’t make what money they can, when they can, with their hard work? Of course not!
I also get frustrated when I fall in love with a new TV series, but it doesn’t do well enough to renew. Or when a favorite restaurant changes its menu and stops offering my entree.
I’ll get over it. And the author/network/restaurant will go on without my continued (or immediately continued) support.
But it doesn’t stop my feelings, either.
said on...For me it’s HB. But this is only because I actually love the weight, the feel, of a book. For me reading is as much a physical experience as an intellectual/emotional. Even in bed; I prop a hardback on my chest and don’t even care that it digs a little into my sternum because it lets me know I’m getting ready to travel where ever a writer is taking me...it’s almost ritualistic now that I think about it. But back to the HB verses trade thing. I would also like to say I don’t mind when a favorite author goes HB; they’ve arrived, that’s cool. If I can’t afford it I wait until I can or until it comes out in PB or the library or at a used book store. Though I’m such a book slut that I tend to not wait and buy the book and eat pasta for the week to make up the budget difference. OMG, isn’t altering your life to satisfy a craving part of the definition of a junky? And I’m “going” to a group of anonymous people discussing it!!! Holy Shit, it’s official I’m an addict…
I wanted to add…
Qadesh said:
~If I find I can’t wait, I have been known to sit in the bookstore and read the book.~
I love it! Me too! OMG. It’s another sign…sigh.
Hi, my name is Anna and I’m a Book Addict.
Bimbo, I find the term betrayal harsh.
And I find statements like ‘don’t they make enough money’ intrusive and ill informed. The same way if I whined: Buying my books used takes money out of my mouth! is off as it’s not the reader’s responsibility to worry about my bank account.
You do have a choice on which format to buy if and when a book is published in hardcover. You have the choice to wait for the paperback edition.
The idea that an author or a publisher betrays readers by publishing in hardcover is incomprehensible to me--and I’ve already responded to that.
Even in these 50-odd comments there are diverse opinions on likes and dislikes re format. Some prefer hardcover, some soft, some hate trade size, some love it, some want more e-books.
Publishing in any of these formats doesn’t betray the reader. The reader has the choice to buy or not buy.
As for the idea of publishing in all formats at the same time, I’d like a bookseller’s take on this. One title, multiple formats--and all those titles by various authors and publishers coming out every month. Where would the bookstore shelve all those formats of each title? I could be off here, but picturing my husband’s bookstore faced with this, he would be seriously overwhelmed. And since he’s in the business of selling books would probably have to cut back dramatically on his midlist stock and books by new authors to make room for the multi-formats by known sellers.
Interesting discussion! My guess, from what I see at bookshops in Oz and places like Amazon online is that a LOT more titles are initially released in HC in the US market than here. While there are some HC’s, the trade paperback gets done first, then the mass-market. Diana Gabaldon, fr’instance - A Breath of Snow etc was first issued in large format trade paperback and only recently the smaller paperback size. Don’t think I’ve ever seen ‘em in hardback. So if she’s not getting stiff covers, there would be few writers in the romance/saga/girlyfiction/call it what you will genre who would.
Could well partly be to do with the size of the market here compared to the US - 20 million vs 200 million.
Mind you, price in $AU for a large format paperback seems to be about the same as the US market’s price for hardback.
I don’t see people here giving any sort of sniff of derision at trade/larger format paperbacks.
In the end, it’s the reading that’s a joy and an escape and all the other great things reading can be.
Authors do not decide what format their books will be published in. Publishers do. And while authors can maybe negotiate that point, ultimately, they’re not the ones making the decision.
Thank you. The misconception that authors have much, if any, control over this kind of thing—along with cover art, back cover copy, how the book is labeled on its spine, where the book is shelved, when it’s released—makes me crazy. Not to mention the idea that the average author is, by definition, more wealthy than the average reader and can afford to say “no” to opportunities for professional and financial advancement.
And we get disapointed to say the least, when we have to wait a year to read our favorite books because we couldn’t really afford the hardcovers.
Dude, if we in the US aren’t willing to pay for a hardback, we have to wait a year, too. Most people who purchase hardbacks do so because they want to keep them, so saying that I’ll get the book next month in some used bookstore is a pipe dream. And, as much as I like to think that the library is grand and glorious and wonderful and perfect, their budget is limited and they don’t purchase every book I want. (And I work here and can hassle the collection development librarian on a daily basis.)
Sometimes, people just have to suck it up and wait.
I don’t see people here giving any sort of sniff of derision at trade/larger format paperbacks.
Ironically, given that Roberts is a bit under attack here, she petitioned the Bitchery for feedback regarding the larger paperback size. I think many readers responded on this site that they didn’t like it and thought it was too expensive. And that Roberts requested that her books not be published in that size (if I have this wrong, please correct me). I am guessing that Roberts is one author who has enough power to do that and not many authors do.
I like trade paperbacks but I am not a fan of the increased cost but it is better than the “venti” paperback, imo.
One thing that I really hate is reprints that are sold as new books. I find that more betraying/sneaky than anything. One author has a logo put on the front to clearly distinguish when it is a new book and when it is not which I think is very helpful to the readers. I understand that was done in response to readers being irked about buying reprints when they were thought to be buying new. That author I believe is also Roberts. There’s probably some negative things to be said about Roberts, as there are negative things that can be said about anyone, but betraying her readers isn’t really one of them.
I do understand that sentiment though but I think it stems from the belief that authors are in control of their publishing destiny - which they are not. Most authors, as stated above, have no say in whether they are published in e-form, paperback or hardcover.
I am sure that authors want to be in hardcover because the author makes more money per book. It’s like a raise of sorts, dependent upon performance. Unfortunately, of course, the raise comes out of the consumer pocket in the form of increased book costs.
When you live in the US or outside of it, used bookstores may be the best course of action. I don’t know what the shipping would be but perhaps you could utilize abebooks or some other used bookstore service online. Paperbackswamp or Bookmooch might also be some alternative sources for books. It’s tough to want a book and not be able to afford it and therefore that can be very frustrating as a reader. Sometimes all a reader, in that position can do, is wait.
I think that releasing books in eformat can help because there are no shipping costs and maybe with the no shipping costs, a higher priced book such as a hardcover might be easier on the pocketbook.
said on...As both a reader and a bookseller, I have to say, paperbacks, sell more over all.
Recently, there was a discussion on AAR, about Luna, and it was brought up, that more of us would have been buying more series from them, if they were in massmarket. I know my customers feel that way. I have a list, of which series people want me to order copies for them, once they hit massmarket. Some of the books, we have been waiting for well over 2 years, and still no massmarket in sight. Luna could be making money out of my shop, a lot more than they do, if they published in massmarket first.
Being in Australia, I have to import most of the romance titles we sell, as well as fantasy/SciFi. The import cost, frankly, isn’t that much, for massmarkets. HB, is another story. With the exchange rate (which right now, is quite good), US HB’s cost almost 3 times what a massmarket book does, and even my diehard readers, baulk at paying that. Its pointless, for the most part, for me to bother with them, especially if Borders or Target bring them in, and sell them at cost (which they do). Hell, I can go to Target, buy 10 copies and make more money selling them that way, than I can getting them in myself!
I understand how great it is for a genre author to move into HB sales, and the fangirl in me cheers when an author I like gets to do that...the reader in me curses, while my wallet cringes. My customers, do the same.
I sold 8 copies of the last Feehan in HB, but I have sold over 40 copies of each of her paperbacks, (I have a smallish shop, so thats damn good), and my wait list of the HB book, when it comes out in massmarket, is 30. Ditto for Kenyon. I put out a pre-order lists for the new Harris, Armstrong and Harrison books, and despite those authors being best sellers, their backstock I have to reorder almost monthly, I had zero sign up. My customers are waiting for the massmarkets. Once those are out, I’ll move 20-30 each, in the first few weeks they are out. The last 4 LKH HB’s, sold less than 5 each...when the massmarkets come out, I sell 20-30.
Those customers who don’t want to wait, and don’t want to pay HB prices, they shop online, for used HB’s and pay to import them..and it still works out as less than it would cost to buy them new, here.
Either way, the authors are getting nothing, at least around my neck of the woods.
If I was still in the US, I would be doing what others are doing, hiding in a bookshop and reading the books in there...and once they came out in massmarket, I’d buy my own copy to reread.
(as a total aside, I too read each Feehan when it comes out, bitch about how damn lame it was, and swear its my last one...then her next comes out, and there I am, wanting to throw it against the wall, but reading the whole thing, generally in one sitting. WTF is up with that? Does she put crack in those things??)
Answering Nora, which I sorta already did...but in my shop, I put HB, TB and massmarkets together, I let the reader sort out what they want to buy (I often import a title, as well as buy the local version). Its a cover art thing..really. Frankly, I like your AU covers better, but many of my readers like the US ones..so I get both, which means I will have a massmarket US version and a TB AU version, at the same time. If I have massmarkets of both, then your AU versions still sell less than the US ones.
-FYI for those not in AU- A massmarket new release, down here, runs between $16.95 and 22.95, depending on the publisher if local, and who imported it if not. Me, I sell my imports for around $16-18 (local copies generally cost more..yes, AU publishers charge more for a book, than it costs to import the same title). So for a reader on a budget, trying a new author, can be more than they can afford to do..unless its a used book and they can spend around $9 to see if they like them or not.
said on...Geez guys, it’s only a year to wait for the paperback! Drug companies used to have a 17 year patent and they’re whining that it’s been cut back to only a dozen years. Poor babies. There can be a $100 difference a month between a brand name drug and a generic. Oh, and some people need these drugs to stay alive.
I buy hardbound when I can, because they stand up better if they’re keepers. And if they’re not keepers, my local public library loves getting hardbound bestsellers donated to them. Plus, I deduct 80% of the cost of the book, which puts it at about the cost a paperback.
When I got used to my elliptical and stopped using books on tape to distract myself from the pain, I donated all of them to the library. I swear the little dude was drooling.
There are tons of nations that don’t recognize US copywrites and translate popular American books without paying the author a dime. How fair is that? You should have heard the outcry when poor African nations tried to get generic HIV drugs.
Just sayin’. End of rant.
04.24.07 at 07:00 AM |