The New York Times refers to the prospect of rising e-book sales as the “digital apocalypse.”
The New York Times (9/22/15) reports slowing e-book sales as the “digital apocalypse” that didn’t happen. “Five years ago, the book world was seized by collective panic over the uncertain future of print,” reporter Alexandra Alter writes. “Publishers and authors feared that cheaper e-books would cannibalize their business.”
But the metaphorical cannibal apocalypse has failed to materialize, as “digital sales have instead slowed sharply.” What’s the explanation for the “surprising resilience of print”? Consumer preference, is the main story the Times tells: “Young readers who are digital natives still prefer reading on paper” and “e-reading devices fell out of fashion.” Thank goodness for people’s undeniable love of good old-fashioned real books, is the underlying tone.
Then, three-quarters of the way through the lengthy piece, the real economics of the publishing industry appear:
Higher e-book prices may also be driving readers back to paper.
As publishers renegotiated new terms with Amazon in the past year and demanded the ability to set their own e-book prices, many have started charging more. With little difference in price between a $13 e-book and a paperback, some consumers may be opting for the print version.
On Amazon, the paperback editions of some popular titles, like The Goldfinch by Donna Tartt, are several dollars cheaper than their digital counterparts. Paperback sales rose by 8.4 percent in the first five months of this year, the Association of American Publishers reported.
The Wall Street Journal‘s graphic documenting high prices of e-books—and declining sales.
Well, yeah—when you raise prices of things, people tend to buy less of them. The Wall Street Journal (9/3/15) had an article on this earlier this month, headlined “E-Book Sales Fall After New Amazon Contracts: Prices Rise, but Revenue Takes a Hit.” The Journal‘s Jeffrey Trachtenberg reported:
Three big publishers that signed new pacts with Amazon—Lagardere SCA’s Hachette Book Group, News Corp’s HarperCollins Publishers and CBS Corp.’s Simon & Schuster—reported declining e-book revenue in their latest reporting periods.
“There’s no question that publishers’ net receipts have gone down,” a publishing executive tells the paper. Why would publishers want to make less money selling fewer books? The story explains the politics behind this apparent defiance of economics:
Publishers said the current pricing model involves some sacrifice but they felt it was worth it to keep Amazon in check. What’s more, they have noticed a bump in sales of physical books that is possibly related to the higher price of digital books.
The main difference, from the publishers’ point of view, between print books and e-books is that it’s very difficult to self-publish a print book: It’s difficult for an author to distribute physical books to thousands of real-world bookstores. In a world where books are mostly delivered electronically, it’s hard to imagine that publishers will play much of a role.
That’s why Markus Dohle, CEO of Penguin Random House, can tell the Times, “Even 50 to 100 years from now, print will be a big chunk of our business.” He’s not predicting consumer preferences a century from now; he’s telling how he hopes to shape consumer choices by pricing products not to sell when his industry doesn’t want to sell them.
As an older reader I appreciate the ability to enlarge type size on an e reader. Also being able to carry a 600 page book in my purse, along with a couple of dictionaries. I still really love paper books, the feel, the smell, but there are pluses with an e reader. Digital books should be less expensive. I like that independent book sellers came up with an e reader that supports them. I believe it is called the Kobo.