![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
megwritesArnaud Nourry, chief executive for Hatchette/Livre explains why e-books are the e-Apocalypse for publishing - or, for us here on planet Earth, explains why he really doesn't get it.
Most notably:
Wow, way to have economics and business fail.
Okay, let's dissect the problem bit by bit.
1. The fact that Nourry, and maybe other publishers, were apparently expecting Amazon.com to consult with them about Amazon.com's pricing strategy so that it wouldn't be to the publisher's detriment. Okay, I get that Amazon and publishing companies need to have a working relationship, but in business, expecting a separate, independent commercial entity to make your life more comfortable is a good way to not be in business for long.
Of course Amazon.com didn't consult them. It's not their job to. They have to make money for themselves, and if that means screwing the publishers a little, well, they've got a big frosty mug of Not My Problem sitting right there.
Seriously? Your response is "Waaaah! Amazon didn't ask us first!"
2. The fact that Nourry seems to believe that if older, copyright-free books are free and e-Books are $9.99 that physical books must follow suit without giving any thought to how many people actually have Kindles or suitable e-Book readers. Yes, the number is rising, but it's still not a reality for a lot of people.
3. The fact that Nourry is apparently hitching his company to the Hardback Wagon. Publishing has to break out of this idea that the binding of a book should be a factor in it's success. I say we do away with all hardbacks and work on going as paper-free as we can. As a reader and consumer, I know that if I buy a hardback, I'm paying for glue and boards, not a better story. Unless I am in such love with an author that I must have their work the moment it is on the shelf, I wait for paperback.
4. The fact that Nourry doesn't discuss any of the stupidities that publishers themselves are perpetrating or what publishers could be doing to fight back, to become more competitive.
5. Mostly, the fact that Nourry gets angry and scared instead of saying, "Okay, we're going to become more clever, more in tune with readers, and more competitive." I'm telling you, if someone would just say, "Oh, hey there Apple or Microsoft or Whatever Electronics Company You Want, let's make a completely universal, inexpensive ebook reader and make sure every book our company has is available in an easy to browse place and together we can rule the world! Bwahaha!"
I understand this about business. It basically works like evolution. You have a bunch of creatures that come into being. The ones who are good at what they do prosper for a while - but then there's a meteor strike or a climate change or a new predator introduced to the environment.
And the ones that survive in the long term? Are the ones who adapt, change, grow. The ones who can find new food sources, who can make the environment work in their favor.
It's what people are, scientifically speaking, good at.
So, the question becomes, which companies and publishers are going to evolve and which are going to die off? Because the climate is changing rapidly - in both a literal and metaphorical sense - and the winners are going to rule the world. The losers? Are going to be extinct and fossilized before the next decade is out.
Most notably:
He said publishers were "very hostile" to Amazon's pricing strategy – over which the online retailer failed to consult publishers – to charge $9.99 (€7) for all its e-books in the US. He also pointed to plans by Google to put millions of out-of-copyright books online for public use in a digital library.
"On the one hand, you have millions of books for free where there is no longer an author to pay and, on the other hand, there are very recent books, bestsellers at $9.99, which means that all the rest will have to be sold at between zero and $9.99," Mr Nourry said.
Wow, way to have economics and business fail.
Okay, let's dissect the problem bit by bit.
1. The fact that Nourry, and maybe other publishers, were apparently expecting Amazon.com to consult with them about Amazon.com's pricing strategy so that it wouldn't be to the publisher's detriment. Okay, I get that Amazon and publishing companies need to have a working relationship, but in business, expecting a separate, independent commercial entity to make your life more comfortable is a good way to not be in business for long.
Of course Amazon.com didn't consult them. It's not their job to. They have to make money for themselves, and if that means screwing the publishers a little, well, they've got a big frosty mug of Not My Problem sitting right there.
Seriously? Your response is "Waaaah! Amazon didn't ask us first!"
2. The fact that Nourry seems to believe that if older, copyright-free books are free and e-Books are $9.99 that physical books must follow suit without giving any thought to how many people actually have Kindles or suitable e-Book readers. Yes, the number is rising, but it's still not a reality for a lot of people.
3. The fact that Nourry is apparently hitching his company to the Hardback Wagon. Publishing has to break out of this idea that the binding of a book should be a factor in it's success. I say we do away with all hardbacks and work on going as paper-free as we can. As a reader and consumer, I know that if I buy a hardback, I'm paying for glue and boards, not a better story. Unless I am in such love with an author that I must have their work the moment it is on the shelf, I wait for paperback.
4. The fact that Nourry doesn't discuss any of the stupidities that publishers themselves are perpetrating or what publishers could be doing to fight back, to become more competitive.
5. Mostly, the fact that Nourry gets angry and scared instead of saying, "Okay, we're going to become more clever, more in tune with readers, and more competitive." I'm telling you, if someone would just say, "Oh, hey there Apple or Microsoft or Whatever Electronics Company You Want, let's make a completely universal, inexpensive ebook reader and make sure every book our company has is available in an easy to browse place and together we can rule the world! Bwahaha!"
I understand this about business. It basically works like evolution. You have a bunch of creatures that come into being. The ones who are good at what they do prosper for a while - but then there's a meteor strike or a climate change or a new predator introduced to the environment.
And the ones that survive in the long term? Are the ones who adapt, change, grow. The ones who can find new food sources, who can make the environment work in their favor.
It's what people are, scientifically speaking, good at.
So, the question becomes, which companies and publishers are going to evolve and which are going to die off? Because the climate is changing rapidly - in both a literal and metaphorical sense - and the winners are going to rule the world. The losers? Are going to be extinct and fossilized before the next decade is out.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-01 01:57 pm (UTC)Wal-Mart is the single largest book retailer right now. They don't want to sell hardbacks at 9.99 or less, so they simply opt not to carry those books. Which hurts the overall numbers for the authors whose e-books are being carried by amazon at $9.99. Yes, the numbers for a Kindle are still relatively small, but the numbers that would be carried in a physical book by Wal-Mart are much greater and are absolutely devastated by WallyWorld (and presumably Sam's Club) opting not to carry the titles.
There are authors, such as Janet Evanovich, who have clauses in their contracts that keep e-book versions of their books from being released for a month after the street pub date of the hard copy (whatever format it's in.) This is her way of guaranteeing that Wal-Mart will order the book and keeping amazon from undercutting the price. Of course, how many of us are Janet Evanovich, both in terms of sales and the clout to get that clause altered. But it's up to authors and their agents to examine the e-book clauses in their contracts very closely.
The thing is, too, if I'm correct in what I've heard, Bezos has also begun raising the price of some hardback e-books, up close to a more normal price, which is angering some Kindle users, because they're wondering why the hell they should spend as much as they would on a hardback on Wal-Mart or B&N, on something that's not tangible.
Mind you, I'm not arguing one way or the other-- I think publishers have to accept that e-books of some form are here to stay while at the same time, the public and e-book devotees need to realize that e-book sales are still a ridiculously slim margin of overall sales. I'm just adding more bits of information. *g*
no subject
Date: 2009-09-02 01:29 am (UTC)I mean, I thought Hachette was one of the publishers who really seemed to *get* ebooks-- they have a good website, do aggressive promotion on popular romance blogs and websites, and did that free giveaway... Then I realized I was mistaking them for Harlequin, and got myself a huge heaping of LOL. Yes, Hachette, Harlequin and really, the entire romance genre is codding you in the face in this fight.
Back on point, I wonder who he thinks he is fooling when he says "no author to pay". What he means is, "no publisher to pay" because why else would you have random publishers spazzing out over the increase in accessibility of out-of-copyright books that they didn't own any rights to in the first place? In that scenario, the only person making any money is the publisher and anyone they paid in the process of repackaging some dead author's content.
ReadWriteWeb recently speculated about the future of the book industry at length, and one of the only useful predictions they came up with was the fact that publishers would have to step up their game to remain a player in the chain. I wholeheartedly agree, especially in the face of this kind of nonsense. $25 pre-tax has ALWAYS been way too much for me to spend on any book, so much so that I can't even comprehend the kind of person that insists that that is the best price, or laments that that price point is going away.