Getting ridiculous...

[alexpgp]

LJ friend mallorys_camera mentioned a book by Ron Powers on Mark Twain's life, which got me to searching on the Amazon site, which provided me with the following information:


At least as far as this book is concerned, it would appear that the folks in charge of book pricing, wherever they sit, are just a teeny bit pixillated.

I should pay about 20% more for something I need an expensive electronic device to read, a file that I can't lend or give to anyone, or resell, or donate to a thrift store or library?

C'mon, people!

Cheers...

Comments

[furzicle.livejournal.com]

Well theoretically I agree with you. I personally would rather own a real book. But I guess for the surcharge of about $2.00 you have the privilege of having less to store. And I think that is something that a lot of us would appreciate.

[bandicoot.livejournal.com]

Welcome to monopoly pricing ;)

[sydb42.livejournal.com]

I don't think that's usual for Kindle pricing (which you probably know). I'm guessing the discounted the hardcopy of the book and forgot to do a similar discount on the Kindle (or maybe it's part of an experiment to see if people will pay more for it).

I do think it's ridiculous to charge more for the electronic copy of the book (esp. since they can take it back at any time and, as you said, you can't pass it on to someone else or sell it later). It takes far less time, materials and effort to distribute the Kindle version and the price should reflect that.

[alexpgp.livejournal.com]

Maybe so, and maybe not.

The original idea of the ebook was that the reduced cost of production would be reflected in a lower "retail" ebook price, but ever since publishers appear to have been given carte blanche to set their own prices (I think this started with the Macmillan kerfuffle (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10444878-93.html)), this is turning out not to be the case.

Cheers...

[alexpgp.livejournal.com]

Actually, I think this is more the result of publishers (e.g., Macmillan) wanting to suppress the ebook market so as to maintain their "bricks, mortar, wood pulp, printing press, etc." business model.

Cheers...

[alexpgp.livejournal.com]

It's not usual, no, but it's not unheard of, either.

And it's not really ridiculous if the point of the high price is to sabotage the ebook market, so as not to have to "share" revenue with an entity such as Amazon.

Cheers...

[furzicle.livejournal.com]

Interesting take on the situation.

[furzicle.livejournal.com]

Well, it would seem that monopoly pricing is playing a part. And I would point out that they probably don't care what you do with the book after you have read it. But maybe they are also exploring the idea that people who are well enough set financially to own a kindle won't complain about paying a higher price for the product. Perhaps sydb42's comment about it being a pricing "experiment" has some merit.