4 ms·
Not to mention that the ebooks are not cheaper, or if they are not by much.
by teruakohatu 4y ago
Not to mention that the ebooks are not cheaper, or if they are not by much.
- Ma8ee 4y agoThe moment you want to lend a friend a copy they are more expensive.
- BossingAround 4y agoThis was mind blowing to me. I can understand games did not become much cheaper by being electronic-only (though it did give rise to much cheaper indie games) but like 16 years ago when Kindle came out, I thought paperless books would slash the consumer prices by at least half. Turns out the publisher just increased their margins.
- andrepd 4y agoWhile the author's share has not increased at all.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- rchaud 4y agoThis is where used books win, and why physical books need to exist. I will never purchase a digital file for $9.99. I have however purchased PDFs directly from the writer's website, usually for no more than $5, which is OK.
- QuarterReptile 4y ago>I will never purchase a digital file for $9.99. License
- TheCoelacanth 4y agoThe cost of printing a mass-market paperback is under a dollar if you're doing a large run. A hardback is a few dollars. Producing the physical book has a negligible effect on the publisher's costs.
- TheGreatCabbage 4y agoLately I've taken to reading almost only classic literature; since books published before 1923 are in the public domain, the ebooks are very cheap indeed (i.e. completely free via Project Gutenberg). The other advantage of this approach is that classic works are better than the books I was reading before, and there are enough of them to last me several years at least.