Saturday, February 6, 2010

My $4.99 Worth of Ideas (McMillan vs. Amazon)

I have to say, that if I weren't a writer, I'd be pissed at McMillan for wanting to jack up the prices. If I were purely a reader, I'd want the cheapest books available, because that's how it would benefit me most as a consumer. I see both sides of the aisle here. It sounds selfish, but what other interest does a reader have in this? Nothing, except that a reader needs books to consume and wants books at the cheapest available prices.

You could argue that a reader should error on the side of the writer/author, but really, do you think James Patterson's fans care how much his books sell for, when he's already a gazillionaire? They just want books, and want them reasonably priced. The question remains: How much is an e-book really worth? Hardcovers have always been pricey, while paperbacks remain relatively cheap. So, how much is an e-book worth? Hard to gague.

Honestly, $12.99-14.99 (proposed e-book pricing from McMillan) for a new release is a helluva lot better than $26.99 (15.99 for young adult/middle grade) for a hardcover in the bookstore. It's only $4.99 more than the current average of $9.99 for an e-book currently on Amazon. I wonder what the price range will be for young adult/middle grade books. And will picture books ever be part of e-book publishing? Here's what I "picture" soon:

Picture books will be sold in e-book format, with animated images that come to life on the screen. 

A moving picture book. Can you imagine? That would be cool. You still need the words, and that's what matters most to us (writers).


Perhaps there will be an influx of library-goers after all this.
Posted by at 9:20 AM
Labels: , ,

5 comments:

  1. There is a new kid's magazine called Bumples. It's animated and interactive stories for kids.
    ReplyDelete
  2. The more I think about it, the more I like the still picture. There's so much children can interpret in a still image, that they otherwise couldn't in a moving image. Plus, children who read the same books over and over, and look at the same pictures repeatedly, do so to comprehend their world (and the character's world) more clearly.
    ReplyDelete
  3. I envision e-books full of links to the web. So, for example, if you're reading Because of Winn-Dixie you can click on the name"Winn-Dixie" and see a short video clip of a smiling Berger Picard. Or if you're reading Bud, Not Buddy, you can click to hear jazz music from the 1930s or see video clips of the Depression. There might even be clickable scenes that take you to the author's Web site where you can watch a video about the motivation that inspired the scene.

    In fact, I see a future where words aren't even needed in books. They'll be replaced by video. We can call them "movies."

    After all, reading and having to make your own pictures in your mind is kind of old-fashioned, right?
    ReplyDelete
  4. I just want somebody to buy my book.

    As far as picture books, I don't think it needs to be all or nothing; you could have some books with moving pictures and some with still pictures...I think the kids reading primarily still books will end up smarter, though.
    ReplyDelete
  5. Kids get so much animation and stimulus overload from TV and games already, I don't like the idea of adding to it with books. Maybe I'm a traditionalist, but books are meant to be read and studied and absorbed. They are not meant to be a form of video entertainment. IMO. :-)
    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)