> That's what publishers' conventions are
> for, to set the price that all publishers
> will adhere to.
No offense, Patrick, but that's utter nonsense. We have
probably strayed sufficiently from the topic of the list
(which is mystery fiction, not the business of publishing)
that we should take any further discussion on this topic
offline -- but I can assure you that that's *not* what
publishers' conventions are for.
There's passion for a point of view you want to defend,
there's stubbornness in defending a point, and then there's
outright paranoia. I fear this discussion is wandering toward
the wrong end of that spectrum.
Let's not even get started on the subject of capital
punishment.
Mystery fiction, people. That's what we're here to talk
about. My apologies for the part I played in diverting the
conversation in this direction; let's return to the list's
regularly scheduled programming.
--Charles
--- In
rara-avis-l@yahoogroups.com, Patrick King
<abrasax93@...> wrote:
>
> You're missing the picture here, Kevin. $2.25 is
the
> modern equivalent of 35 cents in 1960. If books made
a
> profit at 35 cents in 1960, what's changed that
makes
> it impossible to make a profit with books for
$2.25
> today. Sure, publishers make more by selling
fewer
> books at $10 each. But consequently, fewer of us
are
> willing, maybe even able to try new writers.
The
> argument that cheaper books don't sell rings
hollow
> when those cheaper books are not marketed even as
well
> as the 35 cent books were in 1960. Hell, you can
print
> up a million books to sell at a buck a copy, keep
them
> in a warehouse, then say, "people don't buy
dollar
> books 'cause I've got a whole warehouse full of
'em."
>
> There are basically two ways of generating a
profit:
> You make a few things that are difficult
to
> manufacture and you sell them at a high price. Or
you
> make a lot of things that are easy to manufacture
and
> sell them at a low price. This is how commerce
worked
> for centuries. In the midst of the
electronic
> revolution, some joker realized that you can put
a
> high price on something that's easy to manufacture
and
> as long as the public has no alternative,
they'll
> eventually pay the price. That's what
publishers'
> conventions are for, to set the price that
all
> publishers will adhere to. In 1969 you could buy
a
> good new car or a college education for $3,000 in
the
> United States. By 1999, not only had the price
for
> these items increased literally ten times, but
every
> citizen of the US is hard pressed to just get
by
> without both of them. These are examples of
things
> that were expensive to begin with because hard
to
> deliver.
>
> If you go to the Odd Lot Traders here in New
England,
> you can buy all of the Harry Potter paperbacks
for
> $2.49. I don't know how this works. These are
popular
> books, MPR 8.99, and a discount store sells brand
new
> copies, covers in tact for $2.49? Do they get
these
> books for free? Or is the initial price so
inflated
> that after the publisher has sold as many as they
can
> to the suckers who just couldn't wait, at ten
bucks
> per, they're now prepared to sell their
giant
> remainder pile to those of us who are mildly
curious,
> at a normal price.
>
> I mean, didn't we see this absolute scenario
occur
> with the Iphone a few weeks ago? All those jerks
stood
> in line all night to be the frist to buy an
Iphone,
> and ten days later Apple dropped the price by
$200!
> These tactics ARE being employed in the USA.
Nearly
> everything is marked up 1000%. Sales departments
find
> it much more profitable to sell things at very
high
> prices to a few consumers, then sell the remainder
at
> a mere 500% mark up when the style changes.
Everybody
> thinks they've got a bargain and the
sales
> department's laughing all the way to the
bank.
>
> The fact that they've actually convinced you
that
> everything HAS to be this way in order for
you,
> personally, to make a living is a level of
con
> artistry the equivelant of selling the
Brooklyn
> Bridge. The giant profits made in overpricing stay
in
> the pockets of the people who set it up. The rest
of
> us are paid out of operating expenses.
>
> As to capital punishment, Ted Bundy kill any girls
in
> your neighborhood lately? How about Aileen Wournos?
Or
> Charley Starkweather? Hear about them killing
anybody
> recently? If not, I guess capital punishment
managed
> to deter them pretty effectively.
>
> Patrick King
>
> --- Kevin Burton Smith
> <kvnsmith@...> wrote:
>
> >
> > Patrick King said: "I'd love to see a return to
a
> > $2.00 paperback book.
> > Don't tell me no one can make money doing
that."
> >
> > Sure, and your salary can revert to what it
would
> > have been back when paperbacks were two
bucks.
> > Don't tell me your boss will mind doing
that."
> >
> > Sorry, Patrick. It ain't gonna happen,
unless
> > everyone (including the author) agrees not to
make
> > any money on it. Me, personally? I like to get
paid.
> >
> > And as for capital punishment, if it really was
a
> > deterrent, the few countries that still
routinely
> > execute prisoners would also be the
safest.
> >
> > They aren't. Look out the window.
> >
> >
> > Kevin
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have
been
> > removed]
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
______________
> Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! -
their life, your
story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
> http://sims.yahoo.com/
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 17 Oct 2007 EDT