Most
observers of the ebook publishing scene have undoubtedly taken notice
of the increasing volume of books on Amazon and other retailers. It
has been said that ebooks are forever (or for as long as the
e-retailers will offer distribution). They don't get pulled off the
shelves in a few months, the way print books get pulled out of bricks
and mortar stores. Like most things in life, that's an advantage and
a disadvantage, depending on who you are and where you stand.
For
self-publishers and very small publishers (Indies), that has tended
to be a decided advantage over the past few years. Many Indies are
new writers; others are traditionally published writers who have been
dropped by their publishers or who have dropped out themselves,
frustrated by traditional publishers (“Trads”) contracts and
practices. The fact that their work could be exposed to the public
for a much longer time than the traditional 3 or 4 months has allowed
them more time to be discovered by readers and build a following. It
has also provided a source of income - usually a small one, but one
that contains within it the hope (and the possibility) of a breakout
to greater things.
The
physicist Richard Feynman famously said that there's plenty of room
at the bottom, when speaking of nanotechnology. The phrase might
also be applied to the Indie ebook world. Many writers are happy to
be purchased and read by even a few dozen readers per year. Money is
not their main motivator, though they won't turn their nose up at it.
There's plenty of room at the bottom – i.e. in the long tail.
The
same can't be said for traditional publishers. Trads must make money
to survive, and plenty of it. They have a lot of overhead, even
after taking into account the fact that ebooks don't have the
printing and distribution costs of physical books. Expensive New
York or London real estate doesn't come cheap, nor do high priced
executives. Add to that the limitless demand for profit that
shareholders require, and the financial picture looks pretty
constrained.
Until
quite recently, Trads saw their backlists as something to bury rather
than something to exploit. Older books were taken off the shelves
quickly, if they didn't sell in rather high numbers. This made way
for newer, fresher product and ensured that the supply of books could
be carefully managed. After all, it was always assumed that the
immutable law of supply and demand meant that a large and constantly
growing supply of older books would drive down the price of newer
books. Ergo, the majority of the backlist had to be pulped, though a
few copies might be kept on sale somewhere, to ensure that copyright
didn't revert too quickly to the writer, who might try to re-inject
the book into the market.
But
Amazon, Kobo, and the rest changed all that. By opening up their
stores to Indies, they eliminated the Trads' ability to manage
supply. Previously unpublished Indies were providing the diversity
of books that a large part of the reading market wanted, so supply
was growing even with the Trad backlist being kept off the market.
That was exacerbated by Trad writers getting their backlist reverted
to them, and then self-publishing them.
There
is an old saying - “if you can't beat them, join them”. It has
become very obvious that the big publishing houses are doing just
that, by furiously putting up the backlist to which they still have
the rights. In addition, they appear to be selling these at reduced
prices, in the $4 or less range that Indies previously had to
themselves. I believe that they have been surprised by how lucrative
this business strategy has been.
But
the strategy has several pitfalls that I can think of, all in some
way related to the supply and demand issue.
The
first problem is that filling up the long tail with Trad backlist
will drive down the price of that backlist. Once more, that's just
the law of supply and demand. The average price of backlist books
will drop, but their costs will remain fairly stable.
Indeed,
costs might even rise as the publishers mine deeper into their
backlists, to books that require more manual efforts to e-publish –
i.e. scanning paper books, purchasing and maintaining expensive
optical character recognition systems, and manual re-reading to
locate and correct OCR errors that spell-checkers can't catch.
Skimping on these steps will help to contain costs, but at the price
of reduced quality. And the big publishing houses base much of their
appeal (deserved or not) on the notion that they have reliable
quality standards. Ceding that advantage to Indies would be
destructive, in the long run.
In
addition, as they go further back in time, it will be more difficult
to judge whether a book will appeal even minimally to modern tastes
and cultural mores. Consider how attitudes to race and sexuality
have changed in recent decades. Some older best-sellers would seem
pretty scandalous now, in these areas.
There
is also the legal issue of copyright to consider. It may be
difficult to ascertain just who holds the rights to older works.
Putting up content that has reverted could be a legal money pit for
the big publishing houses. Legal risks generally turn into legal
costs, sooner or later.
Then
there is the issue of how publishing the backlist will affect the
front list. Will people still be willing to pay $25 for the latest
Dan Brown novel or $12 for an ebook by Grisham if a wide range of
quality backlist is available at low prices from the same publisher?
The
big publishers appear to be betting that they can have it both ways;
big sales at premium prices (and profits) for new works by big name
writers, coupled with substantial sales (and profits) from their low
priced backlist. It is hard to say if that is a sustainable business
model. To me, it seems riddled with contradictions, but only time
will tell.
As
for Indies, the strategy is clear. Hang in there and keep on writing
if that is what you love to do. If you don't love writing, consider
another career, because the next few years will feature cutthroat
competition. Either way, though, the future will take care of
itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment