Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The collective insanity of the publishing industry

genedoucette.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 154 posts

Re: The collective insanity of the publishing industry

#91

Post by kriro »

kevinr wrote: post #16

I have a small pile of friends in publishing, so I'll take this from the other side. The reasons for the publishers' apparent insanity are: * Contrary to popular belief, physical production is NOT the single largest part of a book's cost. In fact, even before ebooks, the cost of paper and ink and shipping was actually a pretty negligible part of the final cost. Most of the cost of a book is the highly-skilled labor i…

My counterpoint would be that marketing and selling are often done rather wrong by the big publishing houses. People care about the story behind the book and the authors, I rarely see these emphasized in the typical publisher campaigns. Much easier for a modern author to forge these relationships naturally. The other things you mentioned can also be automated to some extend (typesetting and layout for sure).

Re: The collective insanity of the publishing industry

#92

Post by toyg »

lmm wrote: post #72
toyg wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But i think the point is that you have to outsource it. There is no space for you "outsourcing the outsourcing" to publishers, because there is not enough fat in the market for them to survive anymore (or so they say). Authors will increasingly have to take charge of managing their creations, like it happened with musicians.

Managing production and outsourcing is its own skillset. Division of labour between a specialist "producer" and the person who does the actual writing ought to make sense in terms of efficiency.

Yes, but nowhere is set in stone that such skillset cannot be automated (and hence more efficient, in aggregate). Webapps will appear that will manage such production, once demand emerges, not unlike they appeared in the music business.

Re: The collective insanity of the publishing industry

#93

Post by dilemma »

toyg wrote: post #90
dilemma wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to think so, but in industries where supply is abundant, publishers provide not only "post-production", but distribution and more importantly marketing and branding - social proof. The biggest benefit may be setting oneself apart from the fray. Source: I'm a smalltime author and publisher.

If publishers die, such social proof will simply come from other venues, be it dedicated marketing outfits or some sort of community (goodreads etc). In music, major labels are increasingly irrelevant.

And then successful dedicated marketing outfits starts vertically integrate to beat out competition, offering editorial services, distribution, etc.... becoming a publisher.

What will happen is that some publishers fail to adapt to a digital economy and are replaced by upcomers who are perfectly adjusted to it. Publishing companies will not disappear because they fill a function in the industry.

Re: The collective insanity of the publishing industry

#94

Post by toyg »

lmm wrote: post #75
toyg wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that content generation for books is extremely expensive and non-repeatable. What are you going to sell, the same word over and over? Illustrations (which are expensive themselves)?

At the high level, sell commissioned side-stories for the super-fans. Below that, special limited editions, expensive bonus features, alternate endings, merchandise.

Stephen King (or rather his publisher) experimented with a lot of these options through the years. He was widely shunned in the writing community. There are important cultural elements that stand in the way of such models.

Re: The collective insanity of the publishing industry

#95

Post by pbhjpbhj »

kevinr wrote: post #28
pgrote wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"* Price is an important signalling mechanism, and so---given the costs of book production---it's important to the publishers not to drive the perceived fair cost of books down below, no matter whether Amazon is currently subsidizing that or not." I think this is the number one reason. The issue is that the prices are too high for perceived value. I buy a fair number of non-fiction books and loved when ebooks emerged…

> The issue is that the prices are too high for perceived value. How much do you value your favorite authors eating or having health insurance? This is a serious question: just a few days ago I was suggesting that a friend, twenty published books over the last thirty years, books you may have read or heard of, start a Patreon so that he might, for the first time in his life, afford health insurance. People working fu…

>How much do you value your favorite authors eating or having health insurance? //

Thing is with ebooks the author should make more money, there's a wider accessible market, lower production cost. But publishers moved to close the market and to increase the selling price whilst at the same time accruing the added profit from the reduction in production cost.

The blame here shouldn't be on those buying the books who refuse to be screwed by the publishers.

Readers don't care about the booktrade, they want to read books and have authors rewarded for writing them, the booktrade somehow doesn't seem to help much to this end.

Instead of starting a Patreon, perhaps your writer friend could sell books to readers rather than to a publishing house?

Re: The collective insanity of the publishing industry

#96

Post by pbhjpbhj »

lmm wrote: post #88
coldtea wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Serious answer: I think there is a huge oversupply of authors at the moment. The world would probably be better off if half of all authors (selected at random) were to quit and go find something more productive/lucrative to do. Or you know, let them do whatever they want, and price THEIR work however they want, and then either buy it or don't buy it.

Sure. But if they're choosing to be an author in full knowledge of the economics of it, "working well below market" as the grandparent said, then they shouldn't complain about not earning much money.

You can choose something bad but still not have better choices available. If it's their best option are they allowed to complain then?

Re: The collective insanity of the publishing industry

#97

Post by coldtea »

lmm wrote: post #88
coldtea wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Serious answer: I think there is a huge oversupply of authors at the moment. The world would probably be better off if half of all authors (selected at random) were to quit and go find something more productive/lucrative to do. Or you know, let them do whatever they want, and price THEIR work however they want, and then either buy it or don't buy it.

Sure. But if they're choosing to be an author in full knowledge of the economics of it, "working well below market" as the grandparent said, then they shouldn't complain about not earning much money.

I don't think that's something we can settle with "they knew about working below market so they shouldn't complaint".

Knowing about something and considering it fair and acceptable are two different things.

A logical argument would be: "they knew about working well below market so they shouldn't act surprised" (because knowing in advance and acting surprised are contradictory).

But being hurt and complaining? There's no logical contradiction between doing that and having prior knowledge that a choice would end bad for you.

(Besides they also know that for some authors that's not the case, and they could -- even legitimately for some -- think that they are better than them, and deserve the same money).

Re: The collective insanity of the publishing industry

#98

Post by hrnnnnnn »

amelius wrote: post #86

It seems that all creative/intellectual industries are caught in some sort of race to the bottom (e.g., software, publishing, music). This is sad.

I think it's the same reason salaries are low in the games industry: everyone would rather have an interesting job in a creative industry for less money than a boring job at a bank for lots of money.

Re: The collective insanity of the publishing industry

#99

Post by toyg »

elthran wrote: post #60
kevinr wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh hey, someone better-informed than me. There's also a sizeable fraction of the reading public of all ages who still prefer print books for a host of reasons both sentimental and practical. (The one I've just discovered: I can't read ebooks before bed because the blue light from the iPad screen keeps me up. Whoops.) Ebooks have mostly killed the mass-market paperback, though---more's the pity for beach-reading and o…

> I can't read ebooks before bed because the blue light from the iPad screen keeps me up Seriously, get a kindle - if you like reading you will absolutely not regret it.

This. People don't realize the difference between eInk and screens is massive.

Re: The collective insanity of the publishing industry

#100

Post by cr1895 »

paganel wrote: post #42
kevinr wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The issue is that the prices are too high for perceived value. How much do you value your favorite authors eating or having health insurance? This is a serious question: just a few days ago I was suggesting that a friend, twenty published books over the last thirty years, books you may have read or heard of, start a Patreon so that he might, for the first time in his life, afford health insurance. People working fu…

> How much do you value your favorite authors eating or having health insurance? I'm not the OP, but seeing as most of my favourite authors are already dead (some have been so for more than a century) I would so: "not so much". The "would someone think of the content creators" mantra kind of works (up to a point) in the music and movie industries, where Taylor Swift doesn't compete against long-time dead J.S. Bach, n…

But what about, for instance, the translators of the modern editions of Kafka's work? Or the musicians who play Bach's music today?
Post reply on HN