Book notes

I was talking to a friend yesterday about the future of publishing; he thinks that self-publishing is the wave of the future. It occurs to me now that there's one important reason that publishing may not follow the indy-music route: artists have no way to make money off their writing except their books.

But this article, on why it takes so long to publish a book, suggests the pressures that are pushing towards such a model. Books are published a year or more after they're turned in, and that's because of the sales cycle, not because that's how long it takes to get into print. Once Kindles become more popular--and everyone I know thinks the Kindle is not very good, but is nonetheless the wave of the future--pounding a book into a slot in Barnes and Noble will become a much less valuable activity.

But who will be the publishing industry's Pitchfork? And what will subsidize the editing process?

Comments

"What will subsidize the editing process?" is indeed the question of the day. As a recently published author, I cannot overstate the importance of having an editor, test readers, and, most important of all, the services of a top-notch copyeditor. Self-publishing will remain the refuge of the unpublishable until someone finds a way to export decent editing into the process.

Posted by Eric Berlin | February 2, 2008 8:31 AM

I haven't laid my hands on a Kindle yet, so I can't speak from personal experience, but let's say for the sake of argument that it's as flawed as some people say it is. Let's even say that it sucks harder than Amy Winehouse on a crack pipe. People don't seem to understand that this is version 1.0. Version 1.0 always sucks. The first desktop computers were worthless toys, of interest only to hobbyists. Pong was 2 lines and a blip. How exciting. The plane the Wright brothers flew at Kitty Hawk was a death trap. I could go on, but let's not.

The basic idea of an e-book reader is a good one. It's just a question of working out the technical bugs and getting the price down to a point where you don't lay awake at night worrying that you might leave the thing on the bus. Don't count it out yet folks.

Posted by Jim Nelson | February 2, 2008 8:43 AM

I'm not a publishing person but I've heard:

1. that publishing houses aren't doing much for marketing these days

2. that editing isn't what it used to be, either

So, there may not be much downside to self-publishing for an unknown person. Editing is an issue, but there are thousands of English teachers, community college teachers, and grad students out there who could do with some extra income. If you ran a book through several filters of professional readers, I think you'd wind up with something fairly presentable, and you'd be able to do it pretty cheaply, too.

Two relatives of mine just came out with their second self-published work, a coffee table book collection of bios of local pioneer women. They used a professional photo restoration and a graphic artist and printed 5,000 copies and are distributing and promoting it themselves. They have gotten a number of reviews, including one out of state, and are doing a bunch of speaking appearances and public appearances. The book could have used somewhat more editing, but on the marketing side, they're running a textbook campaign, and the book is selling briskly. It also helps that one of the authors has a store, so he is able to push it on the retail level, too. I'm pretty sure they're making a lot more money on this than they would have going through a publisher.

Posted by Amy P | February 2, 2008 10:01 AM

Baen Books.

They already make a large majority of their books available for free in e-book form.

And they're making money hand over fist as far as I know.

They also "snippet" their forthcoming books on their forums thus driving interest in their titles.

Best sci-fi publisher out there.

Posted by Michael in TN | February 2, 2008 10:06 AM

What if the medium isn't the message, and publishing is just one of many ways someone uses to promote his ideas? Chris Anderson (of "Wired" magazine and "The Long Tail") gave a talk in which he proposes giving stuff away for free in order to promote yourself. The gist: "When marginal cost approaches zero, treat it as if it were zero", and find some way to make money off complimentary products.

Of course, Anderson is writing a book about giving stuff away for free, which will come out no sooner than 18 months after he gave this talk.

Posted by Rob | February 2, 2008 10:10 AM

Never felt compelled to comment before, but a subject I'm interested in.

Are e books like Kindle the "wave of the future"? Yes, depending on how you define "wave" and "future". A lot of hysteria, in my estimation, on both sides of that question. I don't think it's likely that the ebook will replace the book -- but it's certainly likely that many years down the road ebooks will be a legitimate form of media.

They aren't now, Amazon's shameless huckstering of the Kindle notwithstanding, and they won't, I think, in the near term (by which I mean "next few decades" -- yeah, that long) for a few reasons, all of which can be boiled down to this.

For a new media to supplant the old, it has to equal and better what the old offered.

So, for example, the "I-Tune" media supplants (well, there still are cds, probably even LPs, but you know what I mean) the old because whatever crusty album collectors feel, most people engage media on the song level, and the ability to cull out what you like from what you don't was a definite improvement.

On the other hand, I participate on a movie board where, occasionally, people praise/bemoan the idea that dvds will replace the movie-going experience. I tell 'em all the time, never. They're too seperate. What dvds will likely replace is the "broadcast tv" experience, which they are a big improvement on...but that's another subject.

E books will take off when the following problems are solved. Some of these are talked to death, some are implied but not often stated, at least that I've seen, some are never talked about. That I've seen.

1. Got to be cheap enough that I can pick it up for a song. Why would I buy an expensive reader to read, I don't know, Dumas's THE CORSICAN BROTHERS when I can pick up a copy for $12? Or less, if I go used?

2. Got to be durable, long lasting, and (kicker) not liable to be overtaken by "improved" readers. I'm looking now at a used copy of G.K. Chesterton's THE BALL AND THE CROSS, which I bought for five bucks. It's a 1984 reprint. If I buy it electronically, will I still be able to read it 18 years from now? If my reader dies, can I still read it on a new one?

3. Copyright law. I'm not a zealot about reforming it, but one of the few things that ebooks offer *over* conventional books is the chance to read the world's back catalog. If I can't get everything on there, what's the point? I can certainly buy most things online via Amazon. There's no value-added. Tell me that if I buy X reader I'll get complete Fawcett/Gold Medal back catalog availability, and I'll spring, probably.

4. E book texts need to be as professionally edited (at least!) as what's available in a store. Yes, edited standards have slipped. But Project Gutenberg shows us that raw e texts are pretty damn hard to read, as well. (I saw a whole discussion online about this somewhere; I've got to run after this but try googling for Gutenberg + editing standards, or something like that.) Gutenberg sucks -- hard to read, lacks glosses/footnotes, identification of editions/translations, etc. We all bemoan the lack of current editorial standards, but plump a copy of Dumas's VICOMTE DE BRAGELONNE next to what you get online -- tell me what you prefer.

5. Writers have to eat too, you know. The ebook idea *as it stands* is very profitable for those making ebook media, less so for writers, for reasons hinted at in Megan McCardle's post. I'm aware of Baen's experiments and I think they're interesting -- I believe they're intended to drive hard copy sales, though. (Correct me if I'm wrong.) Outside of that, what I mainly hear from the most vocal proponents is the most shameless hucksterism ala Robert Preston in THE MUSIC MAN, and about as genuine, too. I've seen people give stuff away for free, for example -- as a way to get paying gigs. Then the free stuff generally stops. As it should.

If ebooks are really ever going to become the dominant media for the written word -- again, I don't think books are ever going away -- the business model has to be reimagined.

Well that's it. Although I'd also like to point out that if "everyone" Megan knows even has an opinion on Kindle, she is drawing from a very small subset of America, let alone the world. I venture to say most Americans, even those who consider themselves "readers", barely have heard of the thing. It's an elite topic for a certain elite crowd, at this stage.

I suspect most "readers" in America are more in tune with Amazon, and perhaps the rise of booktrading clubs online ala Paperback Swap or the ability to buy used books online through Amazon. Technology has to filter down before it becomes accepted.

Posted by Doug | February 2, 2008 11:14 AM

"[authors] have no way to make money off their writing except their books" -- probably true in most niches, but not in the one I know best, advanced technical/professional books.

When I was a freelance, being the author of well-known books in a somewhat obscure yet important technical niche helped me land contracts for my technical work in that niche easily, speedily and lucratively; and I think it's also helped me later move to an excellent full-time position -- and I've seen similar mechanics at play for other book-author colleagues, including ones whose books are also freely available for download as well as sold in paper form.

Similar effects are observed in open-source software (being the author of a famous open-source program enhances your reputation and makes it easier for you to freelance or find a great job) and, I suspect, other fields such as very high-quality blogs (there are a few people I'd hire in a snap based on their blogs...!), pro bono and high-profile advocacy work by lawyers and experts in fields touching on public policy, etc.

This kind of effect probably won't work for (e.g.) fiction works, and I wonder if the availability of income-from-reputation in certain niches but not others may affect the supply side for the various niches. If so, something should still be observable about that, because the author's direct income stream for the vast majority of advanced, specialized technical/professional books (with the possible exception of textbooks) is already risible in terms of dollar per hour of author's work, particularly compared to what such highly skilled professionals can charge for other kinds of work within their specialty.

Posted by Alex Martelli | February 2, 2008 11:57 AM

"And what will subsidize the editing process?"

Maybe we'll discover that the editing process in book publishing is about as valuable as it is in news media.

Posted by J | February 2, 2008 12:05 PM

I think that quite a few of the 'Kindle Sucks' assessments are coming from people who don't have one. Lately I notice a lot of people complaining about gizmos that they don't own and don't want, for whatever reason. That's fair enough, but unfortunately these complaints tend to be along the lines of 'Product X is a terrible, terrible thing, and very bad and should be banned by international treaty and its children eaten, the earth salted, etc., etc.' rather than 'Product X does not appeal to me, for the following reasons:'

I've had a Kindle for a couple months now, and for me it's easily the top gadget of 2007. I bought it on a lark, but I wind up using it for long periods every single day, which puts it ahead of my iPod or even my cell phone.

When I bought the Kindle, my main aim was to use it for reading free books from Project Gutenberg, and it's been excellent for that. I download the text files, adjust the formatting, and hey presto I've got thousands of free books. Gutenberg editions *are* hard to read online -- but the problem, in most cases, is the interface and not the content. The only book I've bought from Amazon is Upton Sinclair's Oil! -- for which I paid precisely $0.21 less than I would have for a paper version. I can't lend the book to anyone when I'm done, because the DRM ties it to my particular Kindle. But I also didn't have to pay for shipping, and I was able to get the book instantly, at 11 p.m., without getting out of my chair.

Other than obtaining books almost instantly, the Kindle is only good at *one thing*: reading long chunks of text.

Have you got something with a lot of pictures? A lot of fancy typography and margins that are necessary to convey the meaning? Lots of charts and graphs? Is it absolutely necessary to have a lot of information to view at one time?

If any of those are the case, the Kindle is going to be sub-optimal at best. If you're just reading a novel, the Kindle is great.

I was somewhat dubious before using the thing, but after getting used to it, I'm convinced that this is the future of a large part of publishing. There's too much in it for too many people for it not to be. Readers can carry around dozens of books at once, and pay less for them. Publishers won't need to manufacture thousands of heavy books and ship them around. Amazon or other sellers won't need to keep those books dry. And purchasers won't need
to go to a bookstore or wait for FedEx to do its thing before they can start reading.

Posted by Tino | February 2, 2008 12:26 PM

Responding to Doug, and following up on Tino - Doug's comments are thoughtful but, I think, wrong.
1. The cheapness of the reader is not a major issue. If the books are free or inexpensive, a $300 or $400 reader purchased every three or four years is insignificant. Look at the money put out for ipods, smartphones, and PDAs.
2. "Improved readers" - you must be joking, right? Nobody buys anything unless it's sure not to ever be improved?
3. The mass of books available for download is large, and will soon be far larger. Amazon has 100,000 available for the Kindle, Sony has 30,000 for its reader, and there are hundreds of thousands available at other sites. Many major publishers have e-book versions of their books available on their own Web pages.
4. There are actually tons of places online where you can get free ebooks that have been formatted from Gutenberg texts, believe it or not.

Just as people were happy to toss their LPs and cassettes, and VHS tapes, when the next technology came along, people will replace paper books with electronic if the e-books are attractive.

I think the real constraint now is technological. Tino alludes to it - graphics do not really come off well in today's ebooks. But the immense convenience of electronic books will wear away at the paper book industry just as online news is wearing away at the newspaper biz.

Going to a bookstore might be fun, but if you are only going to pick up a book, why not spend 90 seconds getting the book online instead of an hour driving to and from the bookstore?

And finally, (5) The economics of ebooks are also favorable - most of the cost of paper books goes to printing, distribution, and the retailer. Eliminate those costs and there will be more for the publisher, author, and reader.

Posted by Ak Mike | February 2, 2008 12:48 PM

"[authors] have no way to make money off their writing except their books"

This can't be true. There are several people who write books on the side of their normal careers.

Posted by Nelson | February 2, 2008 1:21 PM

One aspect of traditional publishing which has been touched on only tangentially in this thread is its validation and imprimatur function. Even apart from the editing aspect, if I see a reference book is published by Oxford or a work of fiction by Knopf (or an article in the Atlantic Monthly) I would tend to assume that is more worth reading than one selected at random. The fact that it has not been discussed so far makes me wonder if the function is fading away.

Posted by pct | February 2, 2008 3:32 PM

One aspect of traditional publishing which has been touched on only tangentially in this thread is its validation and imprimatur function. Even apart from the editing aspect, if I see a reference book is published by Oxford or a work of fiction by Knopf (or an article in the Atlantic Monthly) I would tend to assume that is more worth reading than one selected at random. The fact that it has not been discussed so far makes me wonder if the function is fading away.

Posted by pct | February 2, 2008 3:32 PM

pct,

The validation aspect is important. I take non-fiction a lot more seriously if it comes from an academic house, and I avoid self-published fiction like the plague. At the same time, I approach non-academic non-fiction warily. Popular history seems to be garbage quite a bit of the time, when not heavily plagiarized. Then there's the issue of "memoirs."

Posted by Amy P | February 2, 2008 3:50 PM

And what will subsidize the editing process?

Open source editing?

Given enough eyeballs, etc.

Posted by ad | February 2, 2008 3:54 PM

Actually, for people like Tino, it turns out that a lot of well-informed tech-savvy people who can't resist Shiny! really don't like the Kindle for what look like excellent reasons:

http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2007/12/why_i_dont_like_amazons_kindle.html#comments

The whole comments list is worth reading, but check out the beginning:

3. DRM. Digital Rights Management software means that you won't be able to read Kindle ebooks on other devices. Books you buy for your Kindle will vanish, in effect, if you change machine. Cory Doctorow nailed it in one when he pointed out that the Achilles' heel of the whole DRM argument is that DRM penalizes honest users, not dishonest ones. (Honest? You've got to jump through all these hoops to use the thing you paid for. Dishonest? You'll grab an illegal cracked copy, or crack the DRM, and thumb your nose at the inconvenience.)

We have a technical term for any business plan that relies on making life difficult for customers and easy for non-customers: we call it "circling the drain".

and almost immediately afterward:

5. Marketing stupidity. Kindle is, bluntly, aimed at the wrong people — and it's the wrong size. It really needs an XGA or higher resolution colour screen — the display technology of the OLPC XO-1 would be perfect (for reasons I'll explain in the next paragraph). The XO-1 display is dirt-cheap, sufficiently high resolution, low power consumption, colour, and degrades to usable black-and-white in bright sunlight. (The obsession with epaper has drawn the ebook industry down a blind alley; sure epaper has a stupendously low power draw, but ubiquitous gadgets (ipods, phones, and the like) have trained us to plug stuff in overnight, and there are very few situations where you will find yourself reading for more than 12 hours straight without access to a mains socket.)

The ideal launch market for an ebook reader exists; it's college students and academics. They're used to paying over $1000 a year for textbooks and often up to $100 for a single book. The books are big and heavy and they need to carry them around. The books go out of date — an ebook reader with an online subscription service for correcting errata and adding supplementary material would be perfect. If Amazon had designed their hardware a little bit differently, then stitched up a deal with Elsevier and the other big publishers of peer-reviewed journals and textbooks, they could have rented pre-loaded Kindles out to students for $1000 a year and shifted container ships full of the things on day 1.

But instead of designing a device that will allow college students to carry all their (expensive) textbooks around in a single notebook-sized package, Amazon seem to be going after the consumers of (cheap) popular literature and fiction. Readers who are unwilling to spend much more than US $7 on a mass-market novel in the first place, and very unlikely to read more than 100 titles per year. And then they're expected to put up with intrusive DRM that devalues their purchases, intrusive privacy-invading monitoring, and (to add insult to injury) a $400 entry price before they can join the party.

Yes: for no obvious reason, Amazon have ignored the obvious, lucrative market and aimed Kindle instead at a tiny population of mad bibliophiles. They've invented the perfect Christmas present for Harriet Klausner.

There's a bunch of other stuff, like it won't take djvu files, a must for someone in my profession, plus it has all the aesthetics of a bleached cardboard brick, but those are nits, really. And I've been looking for a decent reader for a while.

Posted by ScentOfViolets | February 2, 2008 4:14 PM

One aspect of traditional publishing which has been touched on only tangentially in this thread is its validation and imprimatur function.

That pretty much went down the s***hole when Doubleday/Random House published this

Posted by Brautigan | February 2, 2008 4:28 PM

Hi,

I'm sorry, I don't know how to put in block quote formatting here, but in response to Ak Mike, and in some sense Tino:

"1. The cheapness of the reader is not a major issue. If the books are free or inexpensive, a $300 or $400 reader purchased every three or four years is insignificant. Look at the money put out for ipods, smartphones, and PDAs."

Let's put aside for now the notion that the majority of books people will want to read will ever be "free or inexpensive" (although I have a lot of opinions about that, which water down to "I disagree quite strongly.") Let's pursue a thought experiment. I mentioned G.K. Chesterton earlier -- I think he's in public domain. So, I have a copy of THE INNOCENCE OF FATHER BROWN in paperback and you have one on a reader.

You: "Doug, you should buy the ebook version of this!"

Me: "Okay, I'm hip. How much is it?"

You: "It's free! Of course, the reader's $300."

Me: "But my copy cost me a buck in a thrift store."

You: ..... "Why can't you be serious!"

You see? I think this is an unsurmountable obstacle at this price point. Ebook readers have to come down in price a lot before they're even competitive. Any comparision with DVDs, Ipods and the like are in my opinion misplaced. As I hope I at least implied earlier, those offered things *beyond the current experience*. I talked about Itunes before -- DVDS were long lasting and better picture, etc. An ebook at this stage can't offer me anything more than a humble paper copy.

"2. "Improved readers" - you must be joking, right? Nobody buys anything unless it's sure not to ever be improved?"

I wrote quickly, so it's mostly my fault, but I was thinking along the lines of abandonware and computer games. Google it sometime. Or try to get that moldy-oldy copy of Knight Orc to run on your current Vista. What I meant was that ebook media couldn't be outdated. Why would I buy an electronic copy of THE MAN WHO WAS THURSDAY, and then buy it again ten years later, when my ebook reader dies and the new standards don't read my files? While the moldy oldy copy of THE MAN WHO WAS THURSDAY I now have can still be read, and will still be readable, God willing, twenty years from now.

"3. The mass of books available for download is large, and will soon be far larger. Amazon has 100,000 available for the Kindle, Sony has 30,000 for its reader, and there are hundreds of thousands available at other sites. Many major publishers have e-book versions of their books available on their own Web pages."

Well, I know Amazon is pushing the Kindle, obviously, I see it everytime I pull up their page. The above is interesting at first glance, but I'd have to know a lot more about what's actually available, who's downloading it, who these people are, etc. before I derive any real conclusions from it. But let's just step away from the details a sec -- let's, just as a thought experiment, postulate that these are all eagerly awaited titles. (I really doubt that's the case, but let's just concede that.) So? Right now, if I have an internet connection and the $$ I can go online and purchase just about any title I want as it is. What added value is there for me in buying a reader to access *less* titles?

This is my point about copyright law. If copyright law were changed to allow more things into public domain, then you might sway me. Offer me, say, the complete Erle Stanley Gardner for twenty bucks download (let's get away from Chesterton) and I might spring for it, because that's value added. That saves me from worrying about which titles I want, which I don't, those I'll spend money for, those I won't, etc.

"4. There are actually tons of places online where you can get free ebooks that have been formatted from Gutenberg texts, believe it or not."

Well, yeah, I know. That's what I was talking about when I referred to the poorly formatted Gutenberg texts. We may be visiting the same sites.

But you make my point. Why should I be going to this extra trouble? To get something that I take for granted in printed book. Again, no value added.

And incidentally, it's more than just sheer editing/formatting, as important as that is. I like Dumas, as I briefly mentioned earlier. I'll spare everyone a dull bibliographic lecture, but in reading Dumas -- assuming you don't read French -- it's all a matter of finding a good translation of a complete edition. That's editorial control too. Why should Oxford U Press, who does really good Dumas translations, break a leg trying to do this stuff for "free", as you mentioned?

To some extent I agree with Tino. I think things like the Kindle probably are, in the long run, the future of publishing. Ultimately the cheapness of the source delivery system will ensure it's success. But to repeat my favorite cliche, in the long run we'll all be dead, too. For the right now, and I'm sure for the foreseeable future, the Kindle is a curiousity, nothing more. Which would be fine if it wasn't for the wide-eyed utopianism that affects some of it's fans.

The quote from Scent of Violets seems to me spot-on. In the near term, electronic publishing's future is in academic publishing, both textbooks and reference works/journals. One could also imagine a future where electronic publishing essentially takes over the magazine world, although I'm not sure I've seen a persuasive model on how anyone makes money on that.

doug

Posted by Doug | February 2, 2008 5:42 PM

Twenty or thirty years from now, I think ebooks will probably be overwhelmingly dominant. Paper books will be a niche market.

The reviews I have read of the Kindle have been generally positive. Some have been glowing. A lot of reviewers who were initially skeptical of the product seem to have been won over after using it for a few weeks. If I travelled a lot I'd probably buy one. Right now the price point and functionality aren't quite there for me yet. But in a couple of years, with a lower price and improved (color) display, I think version 2 or 3 of the Kindle, or some comparable competitor, could really take off.

Posted by Mixner | February 2, 2008 6:17 PM

The quote from Scent of Violets seems to me spot-on. In the near term, electronic publishing's future is in academic publishing, both textbooks and reference works/journals. One could also imagine a future where electronic publishing essentially takes over the magazine world, although I'm not sure I've seen a persuasive model on how anyone makes money on that.

doug

Posted by Doug

Just to be clear here, I'm not the one being quoted, that would be a tip 'o the hat to the inestemable Charlie Stross, and taken off his blog. Charlie's one of those very bright guys who happens to know a great deal about certain topics that interest me; he also seems to be possessed of a very commonsensical modesty and a nice guy to boot.

One modification I would make to the general sentiment is that I get the impression he has college students in mind when he's saying that; I think the market would be just as lucrative if not more so if you dropped the age of the student down to high school or jr. high. My daughter is in the eighth grade, and her complete load of books weighed slightly over a quarter of what she did (admittedly this is for two semesters.) Her books for one semester bulked large enough that we actually sprung for a new $80 algebra book for her to use at home, just to free up some space in her backpack.

I'd like to see a time just a few years off from now where kids show up on the first day of school or during registration with blank e-readers that the school just zaps full of the requisite texts, diagrams, sidebars (maybe even animated graphics) and all.

Otoh, for recreational reading, I think the humble trade paperback is going to be around for a good while yet. They're cheap, disposable, and can be read in bed. I know, some people say you can do that with ebooks too ... but the experience isn't quite the same. Plus, you can't bookmark your page with a cheetos or a pretzel if you have to get up to use the bathroom. Something I don't think twice about for a used $2.00 cheapie.

Posted by ScentOfViolets | February 2, 2008 6:53 PM

I'm still waiting for the technology to catch up. Regular print is so much easier on the eyes than a computer screen.

Posted by Nelson | February 2, 2008 8:55 PM

To borrow from Charles Stross like someone above, in about 15 years, if it can't be Googled it won't exist. So anyone who wants their ideas out there, and their name attached to those ideas is going to have to support some kind of electronic version of their books.

And editing self-publishers seems like a potentially profitable niche. A potential editor could troll the self-publishing sites, download a free chapter that's being given away to drum up interest in the book, and send an edited copy back to the author with a note indicating their rates and links to other works they've edited. If the author thinks it would be worth his money to have an edit done, he pays for it, and if not, no harm done. Good editors could make a name for themselves, and become important tastemakers with the validation function that publishers currently have.

Posted by Eric J | February 2, 2008 9:35 PM

Speaking as a small-press publisher, let me say that we're definitely keeping our eyes out for better e-book technology.

It's going to take time. The people we sell to LOVE hardback, leather bindings, illustrations, etc. There's a certain tactile experience associated with the reading of a book that none of the e-book readers have yet been able to provide. They also want something that they don't have to worry about a) the batteries dying on b) going obsolete, c) being able to turn around and sell later on.

I have a book on my shelf right now with a copyright of 1768. Still readable--still usable.

Posted by grumpy realist | February 3, 2008 5:38 AM

Since Megan's still taking time off, and this post still leads, I'll respond to Doug and SOV.

I'm not sure that either of them is serious in their complaints about ebooks, but anyway:

You don't need to put something in the book to save your place. The place stays. These ebooks are actually easier than paper to read in bed or anywhere else, because you don't have to hold it open, or use two hands to hold the book while you turn the page.

The idea that some random blogger is smarter about marketing than Jeff Bezos and the guys at Sony is ridiculous. Eink is extremely popular. All the eink devices are sold out and demand has been apparently increasing since they were introduced last year. Your comment about time between charges indicates that you are not much of a traveler.

SOV, the Kindle is aimed at the folks who buy hardbound bestsellers, and who buy books at airport bookstores. These people have lots more disposable income than students, and are willing to spend money for time and convenience. They also are primarily looking for text, while students need graphics. Kindle's raging success is proof that Bezos' aim went true.

Doug, it might be a buck for a used Chesterton novel. But you can get hundreds, even thousands of free Chesterton-equivalents for the Kindle, Sony, Cybook, or Iliad. You don't have to spend an hour getting to the store to find it. You can keep all of your books in one device, which you can take with you. With a Kindle, you can be riding on a bus, decide you want to read a best-seller, and be reading it a minute later.

Finally, on DRM: I assume the drawbacks of DRM are the reason that iTunes and the iPod are such flops.

Posted by Ak Mike | February 3, 2008 12:38 PM

I have been freelancing for three decades and have experienced all angles of publishing except the really big houses. In the end I determined that for me the best alternative, considering today's technology, was to self-publish.

For a writer to aspire to achieve self-supporting traditional publishing today is rather comparable to an actor aspiring to become Tom Cruise. The stable of authors represented on the shelves of Barnes and Noble stores is that small, and new authors are less welcome each year.

Mid-range publishing houses are still an option, but all traditional presses have the problem Megan discusses: ridiculously long lag-time. While the rest of the media evolves more and more into rabbits, publishing stays a tortoise. I cannot believe the tortoise mentality will work for long in the 21st century.

With the advent of ebook and print-on-demand publishing, countless small independent publishers spring up every year, offering new opportunities to unknown authors. Unfortunately, countless among them also close every year. Nevertheless, these technologies provide a viable alternative to the Tortoise Problem.

And fortunately, these technologies are available to authors interested in publishing themselves. All the tools are free or very inexpensive, and to authors who take proper pains (use professional editors and graphic designers, etc.), the resulting product can be indistinguishable, or even better than, books produced by traditional publishers.

I am living proof that self-publishing can work and be a preferable option for an author. After experiencing the shut-down of two publishers, I at last took control. I republished my backlist of romance works (written as "Diana Laurence") and for three years have release new titles myself. I make more money than I did before, produce better books, and completely control my own career.

I admit that a large portion of vanity or self-published books are substandard quality. However, many are excellent, and the reading public is open to buying them. In fact, the reading public is realizing the vast inventory of titles offered by Amazon and B&N's website (where self-publishers do most of their sales) is a far better place to meet their individual needs than the selection in big box stores. Readers are also coming around to the ebook option (I publish all my titles in pdf, MS Reader, Mobipocket and Kindle editions as well as paperback), where the risk of trying a new author is diminished.

For anyone interested in the full details of how I create, publish, and promote books, for a mere $2.99 you can buy a pdf copy of my book "Do-It-YourSelf-Publishing" (see http://www.dianalaurence.com/diyp.html), which was endorsed by famed SF author and small press supporter Piers Anthony. Sorry for the commercial, but I think the book would be helpful to many considering this approach to getting their work in print.

Diane Lau, Publisher
Living Beyond Reality Press

Posted by Diane Lau | February 3, 2008 3:10 PM

I just searched on Amazon for a few of my favorite books, to see how complete their library is. So far only one of them is available for the Kindle. I'll check back in a couple years, hopefully they'll have a bigger selection, and I'll start thinking seriously about this whole ebook thing.

Posted by mad6798j | February 3, 2008 3:20 PM

"I'm not sure that either of them is serious in their complaints about ebooks, but anyway"

I can't speak for others, but why on earth would you presume that I wasn't? I haven't posted anywhere else here about anything else, have I?

"You don't need to put something in the book to save your place. The place stays. These ebooks are actually easier than paper to read in bed or anywhere else, because you don't have to hold it open, or use two hands to hold the book while you turn the page."

Not a response to anything I was saying, so I won't respond directly. I just want to note paranthetically that I've seen other arguments about this on other boards, and sometimes the staunchest proponents of ebook technology make the most absurd claims. For example, I remember one guy arguing that books were just too clunky to carry around -- I think as I read that I actually had a mass market paperback stuffed in my back pocket. Or sometimes people argue things like the above, where suddenly it's an unendurable trial to hold the book open or turn the page.

I really don't know what to say. I suspect this is just huckersterism, and the proponent's tongue is firmly in cheek. If it's true, well, if it's really such a burden for one to turn the pages in bed, perhaps reading is not indicated.

I probably am the intended target audience for them -- I just sat here and tried to think about how much a year I spend on books, and it's probably around a thousand a year. That's probably a conservative estimate, too. Mostly fiction. I'm no computer genius, but I'm reasonably comfortable with the things and might consider it. (While I like paper books, for example, I don't consider etexts inherently blasphemous. Some do.) If Bezos and company are targeting me, they're failing, for all the reasons I already stated. But then again I'm probably the wrong group to target.

This is how I, at least, think. I did enjoy the notion that there were "Chesterton equivalents" out there. It's not as though the diner's out of Coke but Dr. Pepper is just as good, you know. Although I buy a lot of books online I rather enjoy browsing through bookstores -- some of us (heresy!) consider it "fun", even. I don't really want all my books on one device -- I like having a private library, I enjoy fussing with my collection. I don't think I'm alone in that, I've seen coffee table books devoted to other people's libraries.

I cannot for the life of me imagine a situation where I'd be on the bus and suddenly the overwhelming urge to read DUMA KEY would come upon me. Hey, maybe, you never know, but more than likely I'd have a book with me already.

You see? These selling points I'm not interested in, while the things that would be interesting to me you can't assure me of.

Posted by Doug | February 3, 2008 3:20 PM

I'm not sure if you got my comment about holding your place in a book with a smeary orange piece of puff, namely, that books take a certain amount of wear and tear and that is expected. I have no problems leaving chocolate fingerprints on a $7.50 trade paperback. I suspect the story is somewhat different for a piece of electronica.

SOV, the Kindle is aimed at the folks who buy hardbound bestsellers, and who buy books at airport bookstores. These people have lots more disposable income than students, and are willing to spend money for time and convenience. They also are primarily looking for text, while students need graphics. Kindle's raging success is proof that Bezos' aim went true.

The point of the post I linked to was that students already have that kind of money, the money that they have to spend on textbooks, so the 'more disposable income' is moot. I should also mention that, while I'm not wealthy by any stretch of the imagination, most of the non-students I know could be described as either 'comfortable' or 'well off'. None of them has a Kindle, though quite a few of them read, and more than a few are technophiles.

Finally, again, I might know the wrong people, online or off, but for them, DRM is a big issue.

That being said, some brief googling shows:

http://findingdulcinea.com/news/technology/Amazon-Reports-Strong-Kindle-Sales--Buys-Audible.html

Amazon's recently introduced e-book reader, the Kindle, is selling as quickly as Amazon can produce it. In a conference call to discuss Amazon's strong fourth quarter earnings, CEO Jeff Bezos said that "The Kindle, in terms of demand, is out-pacing our expectations. It is also on the manufacturing side causing us to scramble... We are super-excited by the demand.” Bezos also acknowledged that Amazon is experimenting with some new features for Kindle.

Source: TechCrunch

And:

Wait! The Kindle is a hit? Just because, “Demand for the Kindle continues to outstrip supply,” it does not mean it is a hit. It means they failed to anticipate demand.

How many Kindle units have been SOLD???? Total revenue from Kindle sales???

These are the questions that will help us understand how popular the Kindle is in popular culture.

And:

Erick, I obviously agree with you on some level; but, it seems quite obvious that when a company does not break out these numbers, they are not too proud.

My guess is that unit sales were in the low 5 figures.

The Kindle is a very niche product. At least it was correctly priced.

I just wish you would have provided that type of commentary in your OP.

My apologies if you think that is a troll comment.

I've been looking around for actual sales figures that Amazon will admit to, but those don't seem to be available. If we assume 10,000 units have been sold, and it has been fifty days since it has been released, that's only 20 units sold per day. And that's during the Christmas rush.

What figure would you attach to 'a raging success'? I would put it at far higher than 10,000. And what evidence do you have that this figure has been attained?

I'll admit to not being a typical consumer, but by that same notion, I'd wager that I share a good many characteristics with the target customer.

Posted by ScentOfViolets | February 3, 2008 3:56 PM

I'm not sure if you got my comment about holding your place in a book with a smeary orange piece of puff, namely, that books take a certain amount of wear and tear and that is expected. I have no problems leaving chocolate fingerprints on a $7.50 trade paperback. I suspect the story is somewhat different for a piece of electronica.

SOV, the Kindle is aimed at the folks who buy hardbound bestsellers, and who buy books at airport bookstores. These people have lots more disposable income than students, and are willing to spend money for time and convenience. They also are primarily looking for text, while students need graphics. Kindle's raging success is proof that Bezos' aim went true.

The point of the post I linked to was that students already have that kind of money, the money that they have to spend on textbooks, so the 'more disposable income' is moot. I should also mention that, while I'm not wealthy by any stretch of the imagination, most of the non-students I know could be described as either 'comfortable' or 'well off'. None of them has a Kindle, though quite a few of them read, and more than a few are technophiles.

Finally, again, I might know the wrong people, online or off, but for them, DRM is a big issue.

That being said, some brief googling shows:

http://findingdulcinea.com/news/technology/Amazon-Reports-Strong-Kindle-Sales--Buys-Audible.html

Amazon's recently introduced e-book reader, the Kindle, is selling as quickly as Amazon can produce it. In a conference call to discuss Amazon's strong fourth quarter earnings, CEO Jeff Bezos said that "The Kindle, in terms of demand, is out-pacing our expectations. It is also on the manufacturing side causing us to scramble... We are super-excited by the demand.” Bezos also acknowledged that Amazon is experimenting with some new features for Kindle.

Source: TechCrunch

And:

Wait! The Kindle is a hit? Just because, “Demand for the Kindle continues to outstrip supply,” it does not mean it is a hit. It means they failed to anticipate demand.

How many Kindle units have been SOLD???? Total revenue from Kindle sales???

These are the questions that will help us understand how popular the Kindle is in popular culture.

And:

Erick, I obviously agree with you on some level; but, it seems quite obvious that when a company does not break out these numbers, they are not too proud.

My guess is that unit sales were in the low 5 figures.

The Kindle is a very niche product. At least it was correctly priced.

I just wish you would have provided that type of commentary in your OP.

My apologies if you think that is a troll comment.

I've been looking around for actual sales figures that Amazon will admit to, but those don't seem to be available. If we assume 10,000 units have been sold, and it has been fifty days since it has been released, that's only 20 units sold per day. And that's during the Christmas rush.

What figure would you attach to 'a raging success'? I would put it at far higher than 10,000. And what evidence do you have that this figure has been attained?

I'll admit to not being a typical consumer, but by that same notion, I'd wager that I share a good many characteristics with the target customer.

on edit - sorry about missing the backslash.

Posted by ScentOfViolets | February 3, 2008 4:07 PM

I've self published a book of short stories which you can buy in book format, or also download via pdf for free, but I have found two difficult issues in the process.

(As someone mentioned, you can always find someone smart and needing the money to edit your manuscript in some cost efficient method.)

The problems with self publishing can be narrowed to formatting (method) and marketing.

I've used Lulu, and depending on the software and sytem you have at home, formatting the book to their print standards can be somewhat confusing. But that is an issue that will be rendered obsolete pretty quickly as the firms make it easier to upload and edit from their sites.

The second issue, marketing, is what the essay touched on. People often assume that the content itself is the issue, and having control of it is the answer. But in fact, it's all about marketing. And marketing is what large corporations do best, and to the extent they have large budgets or pools of capital at hand, they will remain at the center of publishing.

I believe there will always be bookstores simply because of the physical world in which we live. That is, I will take a book into the tub and risk having it soaked, but I won't take a Kindle at its current cost.

But when electronic readers drop in price like printers, and can be got for $20, then they will become the standard with bookstores finding more pressure on their margins.

Ultimately we will end up with a hybrid, with corporations and individuals as publishers, and each using a variety of means of delivery. But nobody will get wealthy without a concentrated focus on marketing.

Technology has made it so everyone has a voice, thus increasing the amount of mediocrity that must be sifted through to find the gems.

Posted by Finn | February 3, 2008 4:16 PM

After looking around a bit more, I see that several other people are complaining that they are unable to find any actual sales figures for the device.

Does _anyone_ have access to this? Ak Mike?

Posted by ScentOfViolets | February 3, 2008 4:21 PM

Doug - the comment about holding the book was aimed at SOV, not you.

Doug and SOV - I guess different people like different things. It seems to me that enough people like the current wave of ebooks that they will be a success, and that for a variety of reasons there will be more and more ebooks and, in the not-too-far distant future, paper books will start to fade away. I notice that in the reviews on Amazon, most of the negative reviews are from those who don't have the Kindle, and nearly everyone who actually has one gives it four or five stars.

Recall that in my first comment I noted that trips to the bookstore can be fun. Nevertheless, it cannot be doubted that in 21st century America convenience is next to Godliness, and ebooks are (notwithstanding your remarks) more convenient to acquire than paper books. That predicts a bright future for them.

SOV - good question about the sales volume. No one seems to know. One thing that leads me to think that the Kindle is a big success is that all of the eink devices, not just the Kindle, are in very short supply or sold out. The manufacturer of eink screens has plainly been overwhelmed. I think Amazon was anticipating a pretty good volume, given the big publicity campaign and prominent pushing on the site; yet obviously the actual volume has been way higher than anticipated.

Posted by Ak Mike | February 3, 2008 6:04 PM

I notice that in the reviews on Amazon, most of the negative reviews are from those who don't have the Kindle, and nearly everyone who actually has one gives it four or five stars.

Isn't this what you would expect, logically, of just about any half-way pricey product? I've looked at one, held one, read on it, etc. As I said, I've been looking for a decent reader for a while, and this just doesn't fit the bill. That's not to put Kindle down, specifically, because I don't care for anything out there right now. And, as I said, I think I'm a fairly typical example of the sort of customer they're trying to appeal to.

Or perhaps not. I didn't get so far as to look at the library of available books, but imho, the New York Times Bestseller List is 95%, no, 99% schlock. As someone once famously said, bestseller lists are for people who don't read books (if Yogi didn't say that, he should have.)

But anyway, I repeat, to what figure would you attach the appellation 'a raging success'? 10,000? 50,000? 200,000? You'd think that if the unit was selling that well I'd know someone who owns one. But I don't.

Posted by ScentOfViolets | February 3, 2008 6:29 PM

DRM. Digital Rights Management software means that you won't be able to read Kindle ebooks on other devices. Books you buy for your Kindle will vanish, in effect, if you change machine. Cory Doctorow nailed it in one when he pointed out that the Achilles' heel of the whole DRM argument is that DRM penalizes honest users, not dishonest ones. (Honest? You've got to jump through all these hoops to use the thing you paid for. Dishonest? You'll grab an illegal cracked copy, or crack the DRM, and thumb your nose at the inconvenience.)

The DRM issue is a big one. But the DRM in the Kindle is transparent to the user. (As is iTunes'.) However, despite what Cory and Charlie assert, there is substantial evidence that "honesty" when it comes to digital media is passe among the young. While the MPAA & RIAA seem to be lying weasels about their losses, filesharing services continue to thrive and someone is downloading all those files. Author and long time blogger Jerry Pournelle is very, very afraid for the future of fiction publishing. This is someone who has no fear of technology and has been very influential in tech publishing.

My concern has always been this: when ebooks become a large part of book publishing, then when a potential reader uses a search engine to find that book on line, it is important that the first hits not be pirated free copies; that the first hits be a legitimate copy sold at a reasonable price and easily obtained and easily paid for. Given those conditions I think most readers will simply pay the man the five dollars or whatever is the price, rather than search further to find the pirated copy. The second concern I have is web sites that use free books as a means to draw viewers, and derive their income from advertising; they will have money to publicize their pirate web sites.

When books are free, or make only modest sums from first publication, then the temptation will be for authors to indulge in journalism, not in putting in years to build large novels.

I would think that any system that evolves has to match or exceed what he asks for or fiction publishing will be destroyed.

As for Kindle sales:

I've been looking around for actual sales figures that Amazon will admit to, but those don't seem to be available. If we assume 10,000 units have been sold, and it has been fifty days since it has been released, that's only 20 units sold per day. And that's during the Christmas rush.

An as near as I can tell, they sold out withing days of introduction. I found out my wife tried to buy me one for Christmas and is still waiting for a chance to buy one.

Posted by ech | February 3, 2008 8:16 PM

I'm no mathematician, but I'm pretty sure that 10,000 units sold in 50 days comes to 200 per day, not 20. And who says only 10,000 have been sold?

Posted by Dr. Weevil | February 3, 2008 8:28 PM

I'm not familiar with on-demand publishing services, but as far as formatting goes -- isn't that what LaTeX is for? With a front-end like LyX, getting a a text into printer-ready form is really quite easy.

Yeah, editing is trickier. I envision a writer's collective / scientific journal model in which prospective authors agree to edit each others' manuscripts.

Posted by Matt B | February 3, 2008 8:58 PM