In the traditional publishing scheme, hardbacks are released first and paperback versions of the book are released later, if at all. Nobody knows when e-books (aka: the future, the apocalypse, our salvation, the devil) should be released.
Some think that e-books should be released with hardcover. Others think they should be released between hardcover and paperbacks, and some believe they should be released last, in order not to cannibalize dead-tree book sales. The problem with releasing them with hardcovers is that you’re trying to sell a $25 version and the e-book version, which is likely going to be much cheaper, and you’re trying to tell people they’re equal in every way. Releasing ebooks after paperbacks is too much of a delay (because tech-savy people are not good at waiting, apparently). So releasing e-books between hardback and paperback versions seems the only way to make people happy. Except it’s not really making people happy, it’s just making them not-unhappy.
So my suggestion: release the e-book first.
Hear me out!
1) E-book havers are, at the moment, classic first-adopters. These are the kind of people who tell their friends about the new band, who upgrade to the new operating system first, who had twitter back when everyone else was still signing up for Facebook. These are the kind of people who start trends. They are exacty the kind of people publishers want to give their book to.
2) E-book production is cheap(er). If early readers universally decry the book as terrible, as fit only for electronic bedding for the cage of their electronic pet, publishers can always shout “stop the presses,” cancel the hardcover, and save some cash.
3) One of the big complaints about e-books is they are hard to give or lend. Despite what people say about how you can have more than one Kindle on an account, you can’t give an ebook like you can a paper one. Now, note that the giving of a book almost always happens after the book has already been read by the giver. So let givers read books in e-book format, and then provide them with a handsome, shelf-worthy hardcover they can buy and hand to their friends on Christmas.
4) This strategy creates a collector and fan market. We can see Seinfeld on TV any time we want, but we still buy the DVDs. Even though they may own the e-book, fans and collectors will buy the paper version so they can say they own it. We are all magpies in that way, and we like owning things.
The major downside of this strategy is that paper book sales will likely decrease because not everyone will buy another copy (or buy their first copy in paper once they’re told about it by an e-book reader). The sad truth is that paper book sales are probably going to decrease anyway. We are all magpies and we like shiny new things and we are all going to get e-readers even if they’re not as awesome as books in so many important ways.
I’m calling it right now: the publishers that do well in the coming publishing world will be those that use e-books to build buzz and establish base sales for books that will later be released on the hides of those other wonderful things we’re slowly getting rid of: trees.
Comments 6
Agree with you but I want to put something else out for consideration:
- E-books should be like the first release DVD which doesn’t include much in the lines of delete scenes, behind the scenes footage or the liner notes.
- The Upsell for the collectors you mentioned should be far more than a book. It should be an experience that takes the reader far beyond the original work. Thus qualifying it for keepsake status.
- In the future book publishers need to release the book with the intention of allowing readers to experience what inspired the work. This could include imagery that inspired a certain chapter, or music that was tied to a specific scene or event in the story, and author interviews. Bundle this on a insert DVD or experience that collectors can purchase along with the leather bound hard cover.
I think if a good story is enhanced with a multimedia experience you can sell the hardback + collectors editions and also give the reader a feeling of access to the author. I feel like Chuck Palahniuk probably is a good example of this in action.
Posted 21 Dec 2009 at 8:17 pm ¶Not sure I agree that e-books are the future. They may be a part of the future, but not the only path. Maybe I’m just old school, but there is something special about feeling paper, smudging ink, and actually turning a page that is attractive. I’ve read my share of journal articles and books on a screen, and given the choice, I still prefer paper format. Sure, I can put my entire book collection on a single kindle and save space. But the truth is, I don’t want to curl up on my bed or couch with a piece of plastic. It just doesn’t feel right. And I like owning books to put on a bookshelf. The day we put a kindle or nook on a bookshelf is the day every author should simply cry.
Posted 22 Dec 2009 at 5:42 am ¶Yes, everyone loves the experience of holding a real book with paper and pages, etc., but Dustin, you (and me) are ultimately not the future. The future is the children who text their parents and email their friends and watch tv and listen to music online. I think at some point the tide will turn and e-books will be the more “normal” way to read. And authors will cry a little and then learn to adapt (ie interactive multimedia, etc). I have a feeling books will be just another arcane artform in the not super-distant future? Would be sad, though.
Posted 22 Dec 2009 at 7:26 pm ¶Great post Mike, I think many publishers are trying to figure out exactly how to fit e-books into the picture. Kind of a scary task!
Ensey: I’m with you on all your points. A lot of times writers cut scenes that are perfectly good but just don’t fit. They’d make perfect additions to expanded or collector’s versions. One thing to keep in mind in adding to books, however, is the expense. Both movie and music crews have lots of video and audio experience and equipment already at hand. The expense of editing deleted scenes or producing a behind-the-scenes video for a band would be considerably less than fabricating something similar for a book, since all the equipment and expertise would have to be bought or rented for that purpose alone. Also purchasing rights to even one song or movie that inspired a book would consume the royalties of all but the top tier authors. The expanded version model, however, is still one books should look at adapting, just in their own way.
Dustin: That means a lot, coming from a computer guy like yourself, and I tend to agree with you. Who would want to get rid of paper books? But then I look around and see people watching movies on screens the size of a credit card. People are insane.
Posted 22 Dec 2009 at 8:42 pm ¶I know there have been studies regarding kids using e-readers for textbooks, and the results are quite negative. A majority of students don’t like using e-readers for textbooks. Of course, the readers will very likely get better over time.
I think the future will actually be in e-paper. Rather than having only a single screen, you have pamphlets that you download your books to. This way you still have some tangible form to the material. You can make digital notes and highlights that are saved to that copy of the e-book. Plenty of usability things to think about.
Then again, kids in the future might not care at all. And truthfully, many kids now are already not reading anything, so it could all be moot.
Posted 27 Dec 2009 at 4:10 am ¶You might want to check out this explanation on the “Suckage to Usage Ratio”. This puts the growth of the kindle / e-readers into perspective from a techno geeks point of view: http://37signals.com/svn/posts/2076-whats-the-suckage-to-usage-ratio
Posted 30 Dec 2009 at 4:57 pm ¶Post a Comment