Sunday, July 23, 2006
Are books too expensive?

A few days ago one of the commentators on this blog exonerated copyright thieves on the grounds that publishing companies are greedy money-making organisations who don't deserve protection.  This may be the case in rare instances but by and large general publishing is a low-margin business particularly when compared with other high-risk investments such as oil exploration, aviation manufacture, films - or even low-risk ventures such as investment banking, legal services, accountancy etc.

One reason for the low margins might be pricing.  I think that current prices are unbelievably low by almost any criterion - yet people still think they're expensive.

A full-price quality paperback is £7.99 in the UK.  A cinema ticket in London is the same price unless you go to a posh place where it'll be more. The average price of a main course at a moderate gastropub is £12. A not very distinguished bottle of wine is £8.99.

And the £7.99 paperback is the result of months or years of authorial creativity, 500 pages of sophisticated printing and binding, a complex distribution and marketing network - and something to keep, re-read, lend, refer to, argue about, enjoy.

And this fantastic value is not just confined to works of fiction. When I was a medical editor at OUP one of our best sellers was Sir Zachary Cope's Early Diagnosis of the Acute Abdomen. It was then in its 13th edition having originally been published during World War I. The original price was one guinea - at the time around $4. Back in 1980 we were selling most of the copies in the USA (apparently British textbooks were lousy at therapy but okay at diagnosis, particularly that requiring clinical discernment rather than technological excellence) and the price was $4.95. Applying inflation the price should have been $100.

So what is it that makes people

a) think books are overpriced

b) think publishers make too much money?

Answers on a blogcard, please.

#    |  Comments [13]  | 
7/24/2006 2:12:24 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
It's a matter of perception. Is the book worth my while? Is it worth the price? The typical U. S. price for a mass-market paperback is $7.99. Is any book worth $7.99.

Now add in the investment in time. Is the book in question worth the time it will take to read it? Is it worth sacrificing another book, another activity? In short, is the purchase and reading worth the investment of resources?

Which leads to the matter of author and publisher reputation, which I do hope you take up in a later posting.
Alan Kellogg
7/24/2006 5:56:33 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Books are being cover priced in many instances to permit heavy discounting by mega-corporates.

You have to put it on to take it off, and this is clearly shown in the cover price of too many populist titles.

It is impossible to compare different services with different costing structures.

Hopefully at some stage more publishers will realise that it is the massive differential discounts given to the consignment merchandisers which is stiffling this trade.

You take the higher printing titles offered from Faber, Profile Books etc : all grossly over-priced to let their chums on the Basin discount by upwards of 40%. In the same breath they speak about offering the indies a lite version of their corporate deals - Yuck !! What the terrestial trade wants is some consistency in pricing structures and the end to the manner in which some publishers are selling their souls for corporate dole, and in the process losing the confidence of the ordinary book buyer.

My words, yes, but would be re-iterated by hundreds of other indie bookshop proprietors.
Clive Keeble
7/24/2006 8:18:41 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Clive Keeble,

But keep in mind the economies of scale. When you can print 10s of thousands of copies, the price per copy is less than if you could only print a few hundred. Thus an academic work that may see only 1 thousand copies printed will cost more per book than a popular title that sees a million or more copies done.

Then consider the quality. Premium always costs more than standard, and both more than book club. The big chain stores are going to want their books at the lowest possible cost. Thus in bulk.

It also means the big buyers will concentrate on titles that sell, and sell to a particular demographic. You're not going to find small or specialized titles in those types of stores.

It's simply a different audience. Best sellers, summer reading, that sort of thing. The independent book store can't compete against it. So why bother? The big stores have their niche, let the small stores find and develop their own. Small titles, specialized titles. Attract the audience interested in obscure works rather than engaging in direct competition with the big guys. Everybody will be happier in the long run.
Alan Kellogg
7/24/2006 9:34:46 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Alan

I work with the publishers who are prepared to work with me, to our mutual benefit : as a matter of policy I take all stock firm sale.

My business aims to stock those titles which will have long-term sales appeal and are not going to be thrown into the chopper, white-saled, or remaindered within six months.

Richard raised the question "are books too expensive ?" and yes IMVHO some books are too "expensive" on their cover prices due to the publishers marketing policy. One has only to read the ongoing threads in TheBookSeller to know that I am not the only person concerned about the pricing levels.

Chick Lit, most Richard & Judy titles, Plastic Titted Model's Memoirs, Underachieving Sports Personalities scribblings, none of these titles would ever be taken by me as stock items : but then most indies have moved to higher ground (sadly it is the "dreck" titles which seem to be supplying many publishers with their trading profit).
Clive Keeble
7/24/2006 10:05:37 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
As we left the cinema on Sunday my 10yo son remarked that only 25% of the book was represented in the movie, the action scenes were great but overall he had prefered the book. He also said one of his classmates had refused the offer of a loan of Horowitz's "Stormbreaker" because it would, for him, ruin the movie!
Are they really competing events or different perceptions about the value of content?
David Bugler
7/24/2006 10:30:59 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Richard, if you think the average price of a quality paperback is £7.99 then I would suggest you haven't bought very many recently. Take a look at the Penguin backlist, particularly their modern classics, £ 9.99 and £10.99 is now comonplace. And that is without considering non-fiction.

That said, I think you are right.I do wonder though how it is that potential customers can often ask "is the price on the back the price?" as though every bookshop in the land is a discount operation, when, were they in almost any other retail environemnt they wouldn't dream of raising the question.
Jonathan Main
7/24/2006 11:55:46 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Jonathan,

In no other retail environment would the manufacturer's price be printed on the product: the retail price is so named because it's the price the retailer sets. If we were designing the book industry today, would we make publishers set the retail price? I'm torn on this one: at some point in the next few years I forecast that book retailers will take ownership of pricing to better manage their margin models, and it will be a difficult and costly process to go through. But it has to be done: it's one of those quaint hangovers from the past which doesn't make much sense.
Emma Barnes
7/24/2006 12:29:09 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Emma

I am very strongly in favour of the bookprice being shown on the book : the idea of withdrawing the cover price would lead to "marking up" of many backlist titles to the detriment of both publishers and customers.

However to more pertinent points:

I have a rack of s/h bargain p/b's (3 for £1.50)

selected three at random

Nevil Shute "Beyond the Black Stump" Pan, 1972 cover price 30 pence
reprint scheduled of 2000 printing by House of Stratus...price £6.99

C S Forester "The Ship" Penguin, 1960, 2/6 (12 1/2 pence in funny money)
reprint scheduled for Oct 2006 by Penguin....price £7.99

Laurie Lee "Rose for Winter : Travels in Andalucia" Penguin, 1976, 50 pence
Published in 2003 by Vintage.....£6.99 (OOP publisher)

I don't think that any of the above paperbacks are cheaper nowadays in real money terms, especially given the technological advances in production. I rest my case, pity that Rumpole is not on radio 4 this afternoon !!
Clive Keeble
7/24/2006 1:17:38 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Clive,

Marking up backlist titles would allow retailers to gain greater control over their margins - the control of which underpins most retail strategies. You were in favour of the Ottakar's takeover - because you want retailers to be sustainable, to bring the best range of books to readers? Allow them to manage their own margin; let them make a reasonable amount of money on the books readers search out - those the reader doesn't even notice the price of - and their greater cash margin will enable them to invest more in the frontlist. Readers benefit from better prices on frontlist books and are happy to pay for books they've searched out - it's standard pricing strategy. And to address Richard's initial concern, the inherent value of books might even rise in readers' minds.
Emma Barnes
7/24/2006 2:02:00 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
A while back I bought a Macmillan-published book - £18.99 for the best part of a thousand pages of decent quality Science Fiction by one of the UK's leading SF writers, Peter F Hamilton. Good value you would think except the book was littered with typographical errors and (in my admittedly subjective but expert opinion) had been poorly edited. Because the production values were so poor I consider the book to be overpriced - and the publisher to have defrauded me of my money. That's one answer to Richard's slightly stupid question.
Derek
7/24/2006 2:29:01 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Emma

I believe that the general public appreciate knowing that there is a "ceiling (cover) price" on new books. Trading standards require a price to be prominently displayed for each product : price stickers often mark, and hence devalue otherwise pristine covers.

If my memory serves me right it was W H Smith, during the last round of negotiations with the PA, who were adamant that books should retain a notional cover price. I believe that it was ASDA which were fighting for the removal of cover price because they felt that massive price discounts made the offer, and thus the product, appear defective.

My case for retaining cover price is to ensure that the buying public who only occasionally purchase books, mostly as gifts, can be assured that retailers are not looking to profiteer from their ignorance of the market.

Books were once special, if the public is ever again going to look favourably upon books as a culture feature then we have to get this discounting and mark-up philosophy out of our minds.

My submission in favour of Wottakar's was driven by hating to see the further erosion of the terrestial bookshops : only with a strong viable (and hence more upmarket) retail sector, to counterbalance the mega-corporate discounters, are the public assured of diverse shopping outlets.
Clive Keeble
7/24/2006 5:39:51 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Clive,

Agree re the pricing policies of certain publishers. Some prefer to maximize profits per sale, rather than maximizing sales. Aided by the perception of all too many people that books, as books, as precious treasures. In truth, books are worth nothing, it is what the book contains, the writing and (if any) art that gives any book its true value. You do want to produce a quality package, but you don't want to over-produce.

Premium should be reserved for special editions. Books meant to be saved and savored; read when the reader has the time to settle himself to the pursuit, with no distractions and all contaminants removed from he vicinity.

Rugged books for those tomes meant to be re-read or re-consulted. Flimsy for the sort of work one reads once as an afternoon diversion, with no repeat value.

That said, more times then we'd like to admit we err as to which books will be re-read, and which will end up in the municipal landfill. Max Brooks' "World War Z" (upcoming title) might become a perennial, while the "socially important book" gets remaindered in two weeks, and pulped in three. The reading public has a talent for surprising the publishing business.

Then there are those releases that have to be of high quality. Most any science text for one, for such are going to be read and re-read to near destruction. Roleplaying game rules for another. Those books need to be rugged to stand up to heavy use. As well as attractive in appearance and presentation, the better to attract customers in a very competitive market.

When you get right down to it, I'm all for marketing for as broad an audience as possible. Keeping in mind the possible readership for a title, and the book's sales endurance. While at the same time, remembering that people do err. After all, Professor Tolkein was certain his "Lord of the Rings" would only be of interest to fellow academics.
Alan Kellogg
7/24/2006 9:20:05 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Personally, I don't think many of the books that I buy are too expensive. However, when I look at the prices paid by college students my head spins - especially in US medical schools!!! The irony to me is that most of this content (educationally oriented, fact and image based content) really doesn't need to be printed at all - it would be better delivered online in some manner.

Maybe it's an entitlement issue - regardless of the personal and professional effort applied to creating a book - people think they have a right to access for little or no investment.

Many people think that publishers are just plain inefficient and if they got their acts together books would be cheaper. In many cases there is truth to that, but even the most efficient process costs money to run and the large print runs aren't there anymore to spread out the costs.
ann michael