From the article: >>> "Wouldn’t it be great if you could pay $9.99 a month and read all of the books you want?" I sincerely hope nothing "disrupts" public libraries in my lifetime. As a California resident, I can walk into ANY public library in the state and get a free library card with access to physical books, audiobooks, ebooks. Some branches have laptops, hotspots, tablets, e-readers available to borrow. My local…
In contrast, public libraries around the Philly area are essentially dead. Town libraries are so underfunded that their mortar presences are open only until 7 PM M-Th, close at 5 F & Sa, and are closed Sundays. They have greatly reduced their paper book holdings and now rely almost entirely on ebooks, which number fewer than 2000, and interlibrary loans of any kind do not exist. In contrast, public libraries in Michi…
No one buys books
591–600 of 752 posts
Re: No one buys books
#592Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would not. There's not much indication that this curve and the dominance of a small number of top sellers is a new thing.
I think most cultural goods compete in hit-driven markets. That is a given. But as far as I understood the article claims the downfall of books in general. And that is not true, in my opinion at least. Books are bought as web novel or viewed on Kindle Unlimited or in general as self-published endeavors. And as the link in my post states, KU pays good, Patreon works as well. There also emerge more and more paid and sp…
I've seen no data to suggest this is true at least in the sense it's some sort of major revenue shift. "Traditional" - so non-web novel - type e-books make up about 20% of sales of traditional books, and this has been very slow to change in recent years.
As far as I can tell - and this might well be way off, so I'm happy to see better numbers, the web novel market might maybe be somewhere between 3%-5% of the size of the traditional book market. Both likely can make up substantially more of indie authors earnings - it's certainly far easier for me to sell to Kindle users than getting my books into bookstores, and so paper sales largely come from Amazon too.
The webnovel market is really hard to justify spending time on unless you write in a very specific set of genres, and is prepared to death-march until you get traction. That's fine - some people want to do that.
But KU etc. does not pay well either for most. They pay well for a similarly minuscule fraction of writers, and next to nothing for most. For my part, I'm considering pulling my stuff from there, as it prevents you from putting up your ebooks elsewhere.
This isn't really surprising, sure - it's a market where it's now trivial to enter but still hard to get both good and find a product market fit. So you have a flood of people churning out vast volumes, most of which isn't very good, some of which is good but just up against a deluge of amazing work.
I don't know about the US, but I know there was a survey in the UK a couple of years back that showed that in the UK the average full-time writer, irrespective of platform, earns well below minimum wage, and the vast majority of writers are not full-time. Most full-time writers in the UK at least depend on the income of a partner to be able to afford to write full-time. And that average is pulled significantly up by the top end of the market.
Some people do better on KU or serialized venues than traditional books, sure.
With respect to the click-bait headline, it's not so much that all that much has changed, but that this is the most we've seen the publishing industry numbers laid bare.
And "no one" really do buy books in the sense that reading "books" be they traditional, or webnovel.com or other serial formats, is something most people just don't do very often.
Re: No one buys books
#593Earlier quoted context omitted.
Worrying about the environmental impact of books is misguided. You use far more paper products in the course of your everyday life: paper bags, cardboard packaging, paper towels, etc. etc. Even for an avid reader, the impact is negligible.
With paper books I'm more concerned with having to have space to put it when I'm done. But, I find it more enjoyable to read a physical book, and am more likely to re-read it.
Re: No one buys books
#594Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is an exaggeration. I also live in Thailand, and I just got a library card at the very stately Neilson Hayes library last week. A bit pricey (3000 THB/year) but amazing ambience since the library was built in 1860.
I haven't been to Thailand, but I assume there are also libraries at the universities. The parent appears to be referring to a tradition of public libraries, so these are not really counterexamples. I've used private English libraries in various countries of the Middle East and East Asia. For the expat community, they were really a treasure before the internet.
Re: No one buys books
#595Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well a library is a place where a population can spend the day getting smarter while not spending money. If you're rich, powerful and an unethical asshole those are two things you definitely do not want. Sadly many people seem to think they are really showing the folks up there by retreating from any form of self-education once they are out of school. The opposite couldn't be more true.
>If you're rich, powerful and an unethical asshole those are two things you definitely do not want. This smells like a half-baked conspiracy theory. It's not like the overwhelming majority of people want to get smarter in their free time. I'm not sure how it is in the rest of the world, but in American and all (individual) European cultures, most people don't pursue self-education. I would not be surprised if this ap…
Re: No one buys books
#596Earlier quoted context omitted.
The undeniable minus of a Kindle e-reader is: the illustrations suck. They're just too small. Half the time, my "library" has book covers that I can't even make out.
That's why a retina display ipad is now my preferred reader.
Re: No one buys books
#597Re: No one buys books
#598Earlier quoted context omitted.
You forgot the third and fourth failure modes: weight and bag space. Books take a lot of it. An e-reader is thinner than any book and weighs the same no matter how many it's holding. I used to take my e-reader on field expeditions when I was an archaeologist. Never had one die or break even after months in places like Siberia. The number of notebooks that were ruined during those same expeditions is non-zero, usually…
Considering you're on HN, it's likely a safe bet to say you also travel with a laptop. In which case, an e-reader is still a waste of space because your laptop can just open ebooks too. Or if you don't, then your phone is still a better space saver for reading books with. Yet, you will likely prefer to take your e-reader with anyway (and its charger if it isn't the same as other devices). This is why I find "saving s…
I don't personally travel with a laptop unless I plan on working remote. Too heavy/bulky and more importantly, you need to take them out going through TSA. The e-reader doesn't need a charger for the 2-4 weeks I usually travel. If I'm traveling longer, I'll bring a single additional USB cable (that will go away the next time I upgrade).
A phone doesn't take bag space because it's always in my pocket, but it's significantly less ergonomic and much less power efficient for reading. The value-add of being able to read without draining battery on my most important travel tool is worth it on its own.
Re: No one buys books
#599Re: No one buys books
#600Earlier quoted context omitted.
But there are more books published than ever before. Most of the books that sell hundreds of copies wouldn't have been published in the past. If you write a niche book about something and a few hundred people read it, that seems great. If you're (stochastically) subsidized by a few huge hits and bestsellers, that also seems great. People are reading the Bible, Harry Potter and celebrity memoirs? Great too, I'm sure t…
It's a bit weird that those niche books are sold - as opposed to just published free with maybe print-on-demand for those who want hard copies. The authors don't make (practically) any money out of those books. Even the publisher probably doesn't. Vast majority of books aren't written to get any significant money (from sales at least), unless the author is delusional. It's probably a kind of status thing and cultural…
There are also costs involved in a quality release even of a self-published novel. You want a cover. It's not expensive, but unless you're a talented artist it will show if you do it yourself. You can avoid paying for an editor, but it will generally be noticeable (you might have near perfect grammar and orthography, but you will miss things). If a publisher is going to put their name on it, those things will be at least a bit more expensive, and people tend to want to at least try to recoup some or all of costs even if they don't expect a significant return.
And if you want to turn writing into something more, you want to build an audience, and you want at least some signal of how large a portion of that audience are actually people prepared to pay, so that maybe next time your publisher is willing to put a little bit of money into marketing.
But yes, a lot of books could just as well be free. But vast quantities of writing - including fiction - is also released for free. Turns out there's signalling the other way too. It's hard to get people to read anything, but for at least some parts of the market, it's harder to convince them something free is worth their time.