Skip to content

Posts tagged ‘Amazon.com’

Things Publishers Fear: #5 ~ Authors


Creative Commons License photo credit: alancleaver_2000

About This Series
Things Publishers Fear is an occasional series about the realities of publishing in the modern era. For the record, survival is not guaranteed, nor is it always deserved.


Authors

I wrote the bulk of this article across on my personal blog, but it warrants a full exploration here on Green Lamp Media. You might wonder why publishers could fear authors, the life blood of their business? Let me explain the reasons.

Currently the bulk of authors are in a fairly powerless position relative to publishers. Publishers have money, access and publishing slots. Publishers finance the editorial and production work that goes into a book and have the relationships that ensure distribution, advertising and shelf space. This has been changing rapidly over the last few years.

One way it has been changing is self-inflicted, publishers shedding costs by shedding editors (and, some would argue, quality as they do it). But the other more visible way it is changing is in economic terms as the cost of making a text widely available drops very close to zero via effective digital publishing.

[pullquote]Why should you sell a paper publisher your digital rights when there is no need?[/pullquote]

In 2006 when I was only starting to think clearly about digital change (and had only been writing a blog for some 4 months) I wrote a post called Authors Will Drive Change, it was part of a short series of articles on what was changing the publishing industry.

The point is that publishing is no longer just about books and even more it is no longer about waiting for a publisher to decide your work is good enough for print. Options abound and as more and more writers realise that they will take advantage of it.

E-books will push this change even more. There is no reason why authors’ royalties should be the same on e-books as they are for paper books and in many ways there is no reason why the authors cannot sell e-books themselves rather than through a publisher. Why should you sell a paper publisher your digital rights when there is no need?

What I didn’t address back then and what has become clearer now, is how established authors will also drive change and in doing so, make a much bigger impact. After all, if ebooks begin to account for 20-30% of the market (or more) and of that major authors generate the lions share of sales then their departure from your lists will make a huge dent in revenues.

But even authors with moderate (still impressive but not BLOCKBUSTER) sales can see the benefit of direct sales and cutting the publisher out. The most recent example of this is JA Konrath who writes The Newbies Guide To Publishing blog. He has been posting for some time now about his rather impressive success in selling books via Amazon’s Kindle device:

In short, this market is perfect for a one-person operation.

I’d certainly entertain an offer from a large publisher, if they wanted to buy rights for one of my books. But I’m not going to go out looking for the opportunity. Especially since I’ll make more money in the long run if I keep my rights.

I could even make more money in the short run.

According to my recent royalty statement, my horror novel AFRAID sold about 54,000 copies in all formats, earning me around $27k.

If I released a Jack Kilborn ebook on my own, and it sold like my current ebooks are selling, I’d make $20k in a year.

It’s doubtful I’ll make $17K next year on AFRAID, since it’s no longer getting coop on bookstore shelves. But I’m sure I’d make $20k, or more, on a self-pubbed ebook.

So in two years I can make more money on my own on a self-pubbed ebook than a book released by a major publisher in hardcover, trade paper, paperback, and ebook formats, supported by a tour and advertising.

Unless it’s a big offer, I can’t imagine selling rights to my work ever again…

And There Is More
The IDPF released the figures for February ebook sales. They are pretty stunning. I’ve written elsewhere about my skepticism regarding ebooks and the industry’s obsession with price and a single format, but when one sees figures like this, it is almost understandable that they get excited and distracted by them.

Mike Shatzkin writes about what this seemingly rapid shift towards digital means for the print side of the business and it is an interesting perspective:

If by the end of 2012, 25% of sales for a new book are digital, then about half of new book sales will be made through online purchases if we count the print book sales made through online retailers (mostly Amazon.)

Online print sales can be served through inventory generated on demand. So, if these estimates are right, we are less than three years away from a publisher (or author) being able to reach half the market for a book without inventory risk!

Having half the market reachable without print-run risk or inventory storage; having half the customers connecting with their reading through online paths that make them at least theoretically identifiable; and having a quarter of those customers reading through a medium that enables interactivity will make all the changes we’ve seen so far in trade publishing appear trivial. And if the very perspicacious Carolyn Reidy, her unnamed counterpart, and I are right, that disruption is going to take place before many books now under contract reach their publication date.

Personally I caution about moving from current trends towards future results. I’m unsure if the sales will continue at their current level never mind continue to explode in such an impressive fashion. However, even if we allow that Mike and the trends are half right and we see say 33% or 40% of the market reachable via no-risk required methods by 2012, then the savvy authors like JA Konrath will see little reason to work with a publisher at all. Why, if they don’t require the finance that is one of a publishers strongest assets, would they?
[pullquote]as the market becomes more digitally biased, the greater the risk that lead and mid-list authors see first the advantage of retaining their own digital rights[/pullquote]
This is not to say that publishers don’t offer more than finance, they do and in abundance, but for some authors, the skill set that publishers offer is affordable and at a more reasonable cut than they currently allow publishers to keep.

In my view, as the market becomes more digitally biased, the greater the risk that lead and mid-list authors see first the advantage of retaining their own digital rights, then later the advantage of retaining all rights and exploiting them for themselves.

The future, for all that it offers great promise to authors and thus they WILL drive change, may not offer such great promise for publishers and certainly not as they currently exist and hence why publishers fear Authors!

Things Publishers Fear: #3 ~ Apple

iPad Homescreen
Creative Commons License photo credit: renatomitra

About This Series
Things Publishers Fear is an occasional series about the realities of publishing in the modern era. For the record, survival is not guaranteed, nor is it always deserved.


Apple

On the day the iPad’s availablility in the US was announced (April 3 in case you missed it) I thought it suitable to discuss Apple. What’s to fear I hear you say? Hasn’t Apple provided the fodder to defeat Amazon’s nefarious $9.99 pricing demands and with the creation of the iPad opened a whole world of possibilities for publishers? To which the simple answer is yes but the complicated answer is yes, but.

Yes
You are right, most publisher probably don’t fear Apple. In fact they have welcomed their arrival on the publishing scene, seeing them as useful counterweights to Amazon. But they are wrong. Apple presents a real problem for publishers one worthy of fear.

Yes, but!
Apple has created leverage for publishers that much is true, but is that leverage actually worth anything? Apple seems to have thrown the balance in favour of book publishers in a struggle that is really peripheral to book publishers survival, but in doing so made that struggle look more important than it was. Price, especially the price on specific forms of content (in this case the Kindle edition ebook) is not the sole factor in book publishing’s future, there is much more going on. In fact, the leverage Apple provided has blinded publishers to the larger realities of change and has been, I would argue, detrimental to the industry as a whole.

As for the iPad it is a fine looking device, but the iBooks app which Apple itself describes as:

the best way to browse, buy and read books on a mobile product. The iBookstore will feature books from the New York Times Best Seller list from both major and independent publishers, including Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins Publishers, Macmillan Publishers, Penguin Group and Simon & Schuster.

will not even be native to the product but:

will be available as a free download from the App Store in the US on April 3, with additional countries added later this year.

Competition
So, video will be native to the iPad, so will Photos, Safari, Mail, Notes and a few other applications but not iBooks. Will YouTube I wonder? Think that through folks. iBooks not native, why? Why not build it in if the product is so amazing, so intrinsic to the concept? Because Steve Jobs reckons people don’t read anymore.

I guess what he means is that the people who do read will download that app anyway and that most people simply do not consume vast numbers of books in a given year and in some senses they never did, at least not in the way that they watched television or listened to music. So why go to the bother of including it for a few die-hards who will do the work for themselves?

What he means is that books are not central to the iPad as a device, but they make for good marketing copy. In fact books, as far as Apple is concerned, are probably already fringe media and so are not vital to the success of the iPad or else iBooks would have come pre-loaded sitting there ready to download books.

The iPad is about the things that people do a lot of, watch tv and video, listen to music and surf the web. People don’t read books very much on average and so books fail the mass market test. Publishers have been so eager for an ally in the battle with Amazon they’ve ignored the fact that their ally might not really care about their industry much at all.

Binding us more
And then there is the issue that by keeping publishers obsessed with the iBookstore and app creation Apple keeps publishers locked into a closed development system of Apple OS. Which suits Apple and blinds the publishers to the real opportunity they have, and have had for some time now, and which few of them have been embracing, web based content accessible over any device with the use of a browser.

If publishers had pursued web access for the last five years it wouldn’t matter if iBooks was native, Safari would be their Trojan horse allowing readers to buy access online, bypassing Apples 30% tax. Of course the more visionary have done something like this. The O’Reilly/Pearson created Safari Books Online now has some 40 publishers and I would expect to see that kind of platform thrive in a mobile multi-media device environment. At the very least it is in a position to take advantage of web broswers as well as iPad Apps something most publishers will not.

To sum up
Apple is making mobile computing cool, easy and non-geeky. Apple is making it easy to put video, games, music, photographs and just about any form of entertainment in the hands of everyone, everywhere in a cheap and attractive package. In fact, if Google represents the reality of competition with every book ever published then Apple represents the reality of competition for every second of attention with EVERY form of entertainment imaginable. As a publisher and knowing that reading has consistently lost in a straight attention fight with video, music and mass forms of entertainment, that would create quite a bit of fear. As Laocoön might have out it: “Do not trust the Horse, Trojans. Whatever it is, I fear the Greeks even bearing gifts.”

Things Publishers Fear: # 1 ~ Amazon

About This Series
Things Publishers Fear is an occasional series about the realities of publishing in the modern era. For the record, survival is not guaranteed, nor is it always deserved.


2010_01_08_amazon_1
Creative Commons License photo credit: dsearls

No 1 ~ AMAZON

Despite the seeming victory of Macmillan in its battle to force Amazon to accept the new “agency model” publishers have a sensible fear of Amazon. Like all businesses that sell their goods to consumers through intermediaries, publishers are forced to subject themselves and their products to the requests and “suggestions” of the retailer.

Amazon controls a large portion of the online consumer connection to books. They may not be the best at this, but they are surely the biggest. They have been on top of pretty much every trend in publishing for some time:

    They have exceptional efficiencies in terms of distribution and sales (both in terms of ebooks and print books), the kind of efficiencies that publishers could never equal. Operations, operations, operations. If you can ship faster and cheaper you have an advantage over your rivals. What publisher could afford to build out a Whispernet for ebook delivery?

    They are organised by category and could easily spin out niche based sales sites (and could afford to pay for content to go with that and attract attention) if they chose. If this doesn’t concern you ask yourself if Tor.com is viable if Amazon spins out a sales site with masses of author or for hire content built around the Sci-fi & Fantasy genres?

    They have a powerful presence in Print on Demand and Self Publishing. You think that’s not that amazing witness the small scale gold rush that has been emerging over the last six months as established publishers see future profit and less authorial and consumer concern in Self Publishing. Mick Rooney has an interesting Guest column addressing some of these points over at Irish Publishing News.

    With the launch in 2009 of Amazon Encore, Amazon is officially and finally a publisher. That Encore is currently modest hardly matters, they could easily scale that effort very rapidly if they chose and because it need not support the massive legacy costs that the bigger publishers need to, they require much more modest sales results per title and much less working capital per title. Oh and in 2010 they have already announced 9 titles all of which will be out by April 2010. I expect to see many more before the year is out.

So while a victory on the ebook pricing model seems like a step forward for publishers in may ways it represents a funny one. The “Agency Model” actually means Amazon will now profit from each sale whereas up until now, for new releases, it was losing money. So Amazon stands to make more money per unit of a new release sold, but less for backlist titles and non-new releases. But it moves the goal posts by removing the key selling point for the Kindle, the $9.99 new release price point.

This makes it much less attractive for Amazon to deal with publishers rather than cutting them out of the equation and dealing directly with authors or even with agents. After all, they were using ebooks to sell high priced devices and even if they make more money per ebook sold it won’t compensate them for selling fewer units of the Kindle. The battle for publishers now is to retain control of that crucial relationship, the author-publisher relationship. Having already surrendered the publisher-reader relationship and knowing how difficult it will be to regain traction in that arena, to allow Amazon to insert itself between the author and the publisher would be fatal.

So, from their perspective, publishers’ fears of amazon are rational and justified. Amazon threatens to disintermediate the publishing industry using the talent the industry has nurtured and the content the industry has edited, developed, marketed and grown. That hardly seems fair does it? But then “Deserve got nuthin’ to do with it.” – Snoop