January 4th, 2011 / 2:43 am
Snippets
Snippets
Ken Baumann—
What do you expect to pay for a paperback book? What if it’s 700+ pages? Books are really cheap entertainment. Do you think they should cost more?
I assume when you say that books are cheap entertainment you are mentally approximating: [time spent enjoying a book] / [cost of the book] > [time spent enjoying sth else] / [cost of sth else]. Yes, it’s true: your $11.95 paperback will give you longer entertainment than a $10 film.
I think books are appropriately priced because what your formula doesn’t account for is the passivity of entertainment; that is, watching television requires less effort than reading. Most people don’t want to work to be entertained, and I pity them for it, because passive entertainment is less fulfilling (for me) than more active forms, like reading. But for books to remain competitive, to lure out these bug-eyed Viewers and make them Readers, prices are just fine.
Of course, in a community like this, perhaps books should be more expensive. Where did I see a zine that said “if you hate books, get 50% off”? This was brilliant.
I think books, generally, are appropriately priced.
I feel like this is near to how much books already cost (according to quick amazon scan), but the following is the top price I will pay for books.
$.06/pg up to 100 pages. Sam Pink “Person” $5.40
$.045/pg up to 250 pages. Tao Lin “Richard Yates” $10.40
$.03/pg up to 500. DFW “The Pale King” $14.94
$.0225/pg up to 1000. “Infinite Jest” $24.21
edit: …top price I would like to pay…
I worry about overpricing, actually. For fiction or narrative nonfiction or poetry, $15 is the break even point for me; less than that, and I’ll buy a book on a chance. More than that, and I have to know beforehand that it’s worth it. Investigative journalism or research I’ll pay more for. So for now, most seem reasonably priced. But maybe that’s because I’m used to it. I read somewhere a couple weeks ago about hos drastically prices have risen compared to inflation, and it was a staggering difference. Not sure where that was, but if I come across it again I’ll post.
Of course, a 700 page book is different. $15 is for probably the 200-400 page range. 700, more like $20. Talking paperbacks, of course.
I worry about overpricing, actually. For fiction or narrative nonfiction or poetry, $15 is the break even point for me; less than that, and I’ll buy a book on a chance. More than that, and I have to know beforehand that it’s worth it. Investigative journalism or research I’ll pay more for. So for now, most seem reasonably priced. But maybe that’s because I’m used to it. I read somewhere a couple weeks ago about hos drastically prices have risen compared to inflation, and it was a staggering difference. Not sure where that was, but if I come across it again I’ll post.
Of course, a 700 page book is different. $15 is for probably the 200-400 page range. 700, more like $20. Talking paperbacks, of course.
I think more presses need to offer bundle pricing. This happens sometimes during the holiday season, but should occur more throughout the rest of the year. It benefits both the press and the consumer.
Benefits the press:
The press benefits because they sell more books [duh]. Economically speaking [in these times..blah,blah,blah], vendors do better by offering bundles than they do by offering a single title, even if at a discount.
Consider this: a new book comes out. To promote it, the press might mark it down from $13.95 to $10, thus cutting off $3.95 of revenue. Obviously, this sale will entice people to buy, especially those already interested in the book or the author. However, instead of offering the single book at a discount, the press would benefit by offering, say, 2 books [originally $13.95 each] at $20. Even though the press may potentially get fewer orders, they will make up for the lost revenue by selling the bundle, which has a higher price point than the single book. Also, they will be gaining sales, they may not otherwise have had, since some buyers may not have purchased the second of the two books had it not been reduced in price.
Benefits the consumer:
People that like books generally feel better about getting a deal on two books than they feel about getting a deal on one book, even if they are paying more for the bundle than they would be for the single book. No book lover will say ‘that’s enough, I don’t want more books.’ Especially in this small press/indie lit market, where presses are lucky to have consumers so interested in trying new things and that are willing to read works from authors relatively unfamiliar to them. ‘Big publishing’ wishes it had such devoted readers.
Also, per the example above, even though the % discount remains the same for 1 book as it does for 2, it involves the simple principle that the consumer would much rather save x% on a larger purchase than on a smaller purchase, even if the % discount is exactly the same.
Benefits the author:
This model even benefits the author because it gives them new opportunities to promote their own backtitle book when another pressmate releases their new book. Also, the bundle encourages readers to buy a book they may not have bought for full price, thus potentially broadening the author’s readership.
I agree here. I’m happy doing ~$14 for a TPB, so I never buy hardback, because paying +$20 for one book means I’m spending almost what could be spent on two TPBs. And although books are cheap entertainment if you consider the hours they give you, the price adds up fast if you read anything like the number you probably want to.
a universal price is hard to determine because no everyone can afford the same prices. i cannot afford all the books i want to read so i rely on libraries much of the time. but at the same time, it’s hard to survive as an artist so i try to contribute what i can to the independent book economy.
if it were up to me, sliding scale pricing seems the most fair. but also, anything i self-publish is available in some format for free and is always anti-copyright and can be reproduced without permission.
my goal is to find grants (or private rich people?) so the art itself can be cheap or free.
long live the cultural commons!
a universal price is hard to determine because no everyone can afford the same prices. i cannot afford all the books i want to read so i rely on libraries much of the time. but at the same time, it’s hard to survive as an artist so i try to contribute what i can to the independent book economy.
if it were up to me, sliding scale pricing seems the most fair. but also, anything i self-publish is available in some format for free and is always anti-copyright and can be reproduced without permission.
my goal is to find grants (or private rich people?) so the art itself can be cheap or free.
long live the cultural commons!
I’m like every other moron.
I’ll buy any interesting book at 19.99
You go above $20 you lose me.
I like yard sale prices: $2 for a hardcover, $1 for a paperback. 50 cents for a chapbook.
Take the first numeral in the page count (i.e. 7, in this case), put a 1 before it, and add a dollar sign.
I steal many books at many different prices.
So a 70-page book costs as much as a 700-page book? – and War and Peace only costs $.11?
. . . Okay.
Price should be based on the buyer’s income.
I don’t own many books because I’m broke all the time, but I would never go over $20.00.
Since I’m broke all the time, I’d like book prices to stay where they are. =)
I used to get all my books by stealing them, so paying anything for them feels a bit strange.
However, as a buyer who is consoled by quality, I do not mind paying higher prices for well-made books. The Library of America series is a good example. 35-40 dollars would be almost unthinkable in most books, and there’s the added bonus of them being a not-for-profit, I suppose (though I do not at all feel making money off of books to be condemnable). Being owned by me is an intense process for a book, so I tend to think twice before paying lower costs for a book which cannot sustain itself throughout the (continual and repetitive) experience.