It is ridiculous that it should ever cost more money to buy an e-book than to buy a new, paper copy of the same work. The paper book has to be printed, shipped cross-country and hand-delivered to my door. A paper book is also superior in a number of ways. It is a tangible object that I actually own. I can re-sell it or lend it as I see fit. Once printed, it is not dependent on electricity, nor on any company’s proprietary reading platform. If it is treated with even the slightest care, it will outlast an electronic book reader by years, if not decades. The e-book, on the other hand, has near-zero reproduction and distribution costs, it cannot be read without its proprietary reading device or software, and cannot be sold or lent. This is all well known.
I recognize that it costs money to develop a book–to pay its author, editors, advertisers, and so on, and have no objection to publishers making a profit. Assuming paperback books are sold at a profit, then, the reasonable price of an e-book is, in my opinion, roughly:
(e-book price) = (paperback price) - (physical distribution and printing costs)
Because of their shortcomings, I view the price of e-books as a convenience fee, paid for the advantages of low bulk and weight, instant access to the definitions of unfamiliar words, and near-instant access to the published work itself. As long as that fee remains reasonable, I’m willing to pay it. But publishers should know that if they drive me away from my Kindle, it will not be into a bookstore–it will be back to the library.
I have already purchased and read more books in the six months since buying my Kindle than in the previous few years combined, and I expect that trend to continue. I have heard other e-book readers, even those who regularly bought paper books before, make similar comments. I hope the publishers are aware of this and will factor that into their future pricing calculus as well.
