the business arguments going around

[kaigou]

anghara has posted a response to mistborn's comments about authors, royalties, and the importance of purchasing hardbacks. I get all this, honestly I do; I used to look at hardbacks and think, okay, 40% from the cover price of a $20 book goes to me, and that's a lot more than 40% off the cover price of a $10 book or $5 book...

However, I just couldn't let that sit. I get that the royalties are quicker to earn out if you make more money off the hardback, but I'm also thinking of my own wallet, and how much money I have, and how far it goes. So I ran a few numbers, based on Alma's explanation of her own contracts (which, I might add, are probably still far better than the usual peons, seeing how she's got a long publishing history and more clout than she'll admit, because she's like that). So I went looking for the break-even points between the three options.

A hardback book, at $25, will earn the author:
$12,500 for the 1st 5K sold, at 10% royalties
$15,625 for the 2nd 5K sold, at 12.5% royalties
at 10K sold: author earns $28,125; avg $2.81 per
total spent by readers: $250,000.

A trade paperback, at $16, will earn the author:
$9,375 for 1st 5K sold, at 7.5% royalties
$9,375 for 2nd 5K sold, at 7.5% royalties
$9,375 for 3rd 5K sold, at 7.5% royalties
at 15K sold: author earns $28,125; $1.20 per
total spent by readers: $240,000.

A mass market, at $7, will earn the author:
$2,800 for the 1st 5K sold, at 8% royalties
$2,800 for the 2nd 5K sold, at 8% royalties
...and so on up to:
$2,800 for the 10th 5K sold, at 8% royalties
at 50,215 sold, author earns $28,120; $0.56 per
total spent by readers: $351,505.

Feel free to draw your own conclusions. I know what I'm thinking.

Comments

[muffiewrites.livejournal.com]

Most of the people I know would probably think that a writer should consider him or herself lucky if they purchased the paperback version from a new book retailer instead of a garage sale. My sister-in-law hasn't spent more than two bucks on a book in three decades, and that's only because the used book store she frequents put the minimum price at two bucks with trade-in credit.

I'm thinking that practical advice for the new author is, don't quit your day job.

[kaigou.livejournal.com]

The actual advice I hear most often these days is, "don't quit your day job unless a) you have a very wealthy spouse, parents, or a trust fund, or b) you have five concurrently selling books and contracts for more."

The key is that until you earn out your advance, you won't get royalties, and even those will be scattershot and minimal thanks to the way the publishing companies do their bookkeeping (it's pretty archaic, but there are solid business reasons for that because of the industry's overall design). So unless you have royalties coming in from a variety of titles, there just isn't enough to be able to effectively estimate a regular income and thus rely on it alone.

That said, I only purchase hardbacks if it's the only option, or if I know the author, or if it's a book I honestly, truly, completely love. I don't like mass market paperbacks, on the other end; they're annoying and often too-cheaply made. I've always leaned towards trade; I like the size, I like the fact that the covers are often nicer, the print's a little larger, the size fits in my hands.

The final summation I had, looking at the numbers above, is that if people buy trade paperbacks, it takes fewer people for the author to earn out (compared to mass market), and yet those fewer folks still don't spend as much money as the even fewer buying the hardback. Strange, that.

I'm still a bit confused as to why trade paperback has the lowest royalty rate of all three, and why it's flat, at that. I'm sure there's a business reason behind it, but I find it peculiar that hardbacks and pulp paperbacks both have jumps at some point, while trade doesn't.