"Another example is if you write a book for a nice market, totaling 20,000 potential readers. And you predict that for the price of $9.99 you will reach 35% of

"Another example is if you write a book for a nice market, totaling 20,000 potential readers. And you predict that for the price of $9.99 you will reach 35% of that audience." If you're able to reach 35% of your total possible audience at $9.99, then of course you're not going to make more money by slashing to $0.99. But where did the 35% figure come from? How about I pluck the figure 1% out of the air instead? And pluck 50% out as the figure I'd reach at $0.99? Suddenly the economics look totally different. I'm now making 5 times the amount at $0.99. Unless he's got any particular basis for his figures, mine are just as valid as his (and based on my personal buying habits on the iPhone, mine are not entirely unreasonable. I have spent far more in total on $0.99 apps than I ever have on $9.99 ones and I very much doubt I'm the only one. I know books are different, but there's no fundamental reason why you couldn't see a similar pattern). I'm not suggesting that authors definitely would make more money. But basing your argument on what seems to be a figure plucked randomly out of the air isn't a good way to prove your case. Oh, and whilst we're at it, why does the long tail apply to $0.99 books but not to $9.99 ones?