In yesterday’s post, Gina Frangello talked life as an indie author. Or, more specifically, life as an indie author who is also an indie publisher. She toured, she was paid (sort of), she got great press. She learned lessons.

What happened next. As she says:

I became curious. The indie publishing world is notoriously tight-lipped about money—no one, it seems, wants to quite admit how bad off things are, for fear it might make their own projects look less viable and their company less secure, causing all the rats to jump ship. What writer will want to work with a press hanging on by a thread . . . will the media take such a publisher seriously, etc.? But of course the unspoken truth is that nearly all independent presses exist in some semblance of this impoverished state, to a greater or lesser degree. I began to nose around, though in a transparent way. I emailed some of my favorite indie editors and writers, with whom I have existing relationships, and told them I wanted to write a piece about indie publishing and money, and asked them a few questions. I even told them they could answer anonymously if they wished, and that no one would be quoted by name without express permission.

A couple of publishers did not answer me at all. In fairness, this may not be because they didn’t want to divulge information; it could be because they are busy working 70 hours per week at unpaid jobs, which necessitates they work 30 hours at some paying job, and as a result they have not slept since the 1990s . . .

Of those who answered, several stipulated that they wished to remain anonymous. One said, “Don’t use my name—quote the important publishers,” which probably epitomizes the self-deprecation that is ubiquitous in our indie community . . . I, for one, would have cited this press as one of the top 10 indies in the country! Of those editors willing to go on record, Richard Nash was the most forthcoming—not surprising since Richard is widely known to be a helpful gent. . . but perhaps also because I’d asked about his work at Soft Skull, a publisher with which he is no longer affiliated, and Soft Skull itself has been acquired by Counterpoint and so no longer operates under the model Richard was citing. Thus, anything he divulged about their operations was “passé” and thereby safe . . .

Still, some other brave and generous souls also weighed in, and quickly, clear trends emerged. I’ll share them here:

• When asked how much publishers spend on printing costs for the first run of a book, the range was $4,000 to $6,000. In my experience, the more tech-savvy a publisher is, the less they are likely to pay on printing, because they do all the design and layout themselves and “printing costs” means only that: printing the book. For other publishers, printing costs include design and layout work. Many presses contract with printers who are out of state (upper Michigan is a popular area) and have never even met their printing reps in person. Not surprisingly, printing errors are horrifyingly common among indie publishers, and run the gamut from the new indies to the venerable ones. My friend Cris Mazza had some terrifying printing errors with Soft Skull, and my own galleys with Emergency Press initially produced 200 flawed copies that had to be given away rather than sent to the media. In the case of a problem with printing, in many cases the publisher may incur additional expenses if they choose to correct the problem.
• Print runs ran from 2,000 to 5,000. Keep in mind here that I only approached extremely reputable editors/publishers, so these numbers run a bit high by indie standards. Some indies put out a print run of 500 or 750 books; others are using POD to keep costs lower.
• Publishers are producing anywhere be
  0 Comments on The Glamorous Life? (Notes from the Indie Trenches) Part Two as of 1/1/1900
  Add a Comment

Today’s links of interest:

• Women in Publishing Twitter Directory
  When Jane Litte of Dear Author started the #womeninpublishing meme this morning, we bet she didn’t expect such an amazing response. Galleycat consolidated names and links to the entire hashtag feed. What’s amazing about this list? How people define the idea of women in publishing. Oh, and the amazing community we’ve created online.

Today’s links of interest:

• Indigo Books posts wider loss on Kobo investment
  Building a new company takes investment.

One of the best parts of my job is discovering what goes on in all corners of publishing. If you look beyond Manhattan, you see innovation, experimentation, and, yes, consternation as changes to the industry seem to happen every day. I am asking those who are involved in these ventures to share successes, failures, ideas, and how they are surviving in an industry that constantly seems to be experiencing death throes.

It turns out there is far more optimism, pragmatism, and creativity than there are worries about the demise of the industry. Today and tomorrow, I am pleased to feature author and publisher Gina Frangello as she focuses on independent press and book tours and making money in the world of small press. The first installment focuses on her experiences surrounding her current story collection Slut Lullabies. The second will look at the state of small press.

And now to Gina:

I have done just about everything there is to do in publishing, except actually get paid.

Well, okay, maybe that’s a misleading sentence on a couple of fronts:

1. I do get paid a little, for some of my writing/editing pursuits
2. “Not get paid” is, alas, very much something to do in indie publishing, so could actually go in the “things I’ve done” column as well as functioning in the negative.

At this point, I have been working in publishing for fifteen years. In my experience, there are two ways one enters the publishing arena. The first is to go to Oberlin (substitute Sarah Lawrence, Brown, etc.) and get a low-paid, entry-level position in New York at a corporate publishing house, where you slave for several years before working your way up the ladder, become a senior editor eventually, enjoy some period of (underpaid but prestigious) success, make a misstep in your editorial choices and lose money for your corporate shareholders, lose your job, and either get lucky enough to be snagged by another corporate imprint, or proceed to spend the remainder of your days on Twitter, snarking about the demise of publishing.

The second is to volunteer as a “first reader” of an independent or university-affiliated literary magazine, where you slave for several years before working your way up the ladder, become the Associate Editor, wait for the Editor to retire, take over the magazine, launch a book press, teach at various universities to make ends meet since your editing work does not actually pay, enjoy some period of (unpaid but fulfilling) success before your indie magazine/press goes bankrupt, or get lucky enough to find a Sugar Daddy to acquire you as an imprint (go, Dzanc Books!) Otherwise, revert to spending the remainder of your days on Twitter, snarking about the demise of publishing.

In first of the scenarios, you will have more expensive shoes and will receive invitations to the Hamptons.

In the second, you will have more editorial control, and are virtually guaranteed never having to work for a Republican.

Life is all about choices; that’s all I’m saying.

Needless to say, I came up through the second route. My work at Other Voices magazine eventually led to co-founding Other Voices Books. Publishing short work in literary journals eventually led to my meeting Lidia Yuknavitch, who herself went on to launch a book press—Chiasmus—and published my first novel, My Sister’s Continent. That novel led, indirectly, to my being invited to blog for the online literary collective The Nervous Breakdown, where I

Today’s links of interest:

• Big Improvement at HarperCollins
  Excellent news for HarperCollins!

Today’s links of interest:

• Customer Service is a Ruthless Business
  Since the introduction of the Nook, customer service from Barnes Noble has been a problem area. As the retail giant faces new challenges, they are starting to lose a key battle.

Today’s links of interest:

• Random House sees e-book sales jumping: CEO
  While Markus Dohle is likely being overly cautious in his predictions for ebook share of the market in the next year, his comments on why he didn’t jump into the Agency Model pool are very interesting.
• Amazon: We have 70-80 percent of e-book market
  Interesting interview with Ian Freed of Amazon about devices, platforms, and sales numbers.
• Connecticut Probes Pricing of E-Books
  Second state attorney general looks closer at the agency model. Fun, fun, fun!

Today’s links of interest:

• Amazon to set e-book prices for Kindle UK
  As Amazon opens its first Kindle store outside the US, publishers in the UK decide against the agency model.

Today’s links of interest:

• Kindle to Go ‘Mass Market’
  Wifi only device will go for $139. Wifi plus 3G will go for $189. We are getting remarkably close to a price point that makes the investment a no-brainer.

Today’s links of interest:

• Amid Flagging Retail Sales, Guidebook Publishers Focus on iPad, Smartphones
  Publishes of travel books decide to leave the sidelines. So much is wrong here — why haven’t they been exploiting the web? Is an iPad only app really useful for travelers wandering the streets of Rome? Where have these guys been while others have eaten their lunch?
• Will Random House Chicken Out Again?
  The very smart Richard Curtis makes many of the points we’ve made in the past few days.
• Evanovich Takes Her Bounty to Random House
  A lot of money while the backlist remains with another publisher.

Today’s links of interest:

• Amazon Doesn’t Care About Wall Street’s Concerns
  Interesting analysis from Sarah Weinman. Totally agree.

If you are contract, royalties, or publishing geek, today (yesterday?) was an exciting day. Sort of like the bully saying “I’m gonna beat you up” every day until the scrawny kid picks a fight. All concepts relative. As promised, agent Andrew Wylie did what he said he would:

“We will take our 700 clients, see what rights are not allocated to publishers, and establish a company on their behalf to license those e-book rights directly to someone like Google, Amazon.com, or Apple. It would be another business, set up on parallel tracks to the frontlist book business.”

And, as predicted, there was sturm and drang. Random House huffed and puffed and said they wouldn’t contract books from Wylie authors. That’s a fine stance, and I think it will last until they decide there’s a book they want enough to change their collective corporate mind. There’s principle and there’s business. One makes more money than the other.

I don’t have cohesive thoughts on this, but that’s what bulleted lists are for, right?

• Exclusivity: The Wylie deal (or Odyssey, as the publishing arm is called, deal) is apparently a two-year exclusive agreemen with Amazon/Kindle. I am not a fan of exclusive deals. I think it’s better to make your books available everywhere. My personal feelings aside, if you’re going exclusive, Kindle is the best possible platform. You can read the books you purchase on every possible device, from phones to desktops. Sure there are territorial issues, but y’all know I write long, so we’ll skip that.

  I have three theories on why this is a Kindle-exclusive deal. The first, and most obvious, is that when Wylie started this process a year ago, the digital books landscape was very different. Kindle dominated. Even today, going with Kindle alone is not a bad bet for publishers. Second, it’s possible Amazon offered some fine incentives for an exclusive deal. These deals are not unheard of, and if you’re going for market share, what better way to reach customers than having something nobody else has?

  The last theory is weird and squidgy, but I like it. If you, agent, are trying to convince authors/heirs that going digital is a genius idea, what seems safer than Amazon? Nothing. Recall, if you will, that many old school authors are digital skeptics, believers that books equal print. If you are going to be coaxed into the digital age, you want to go with a name brand.

• Pirate Killer: It should not surprise anyone that the books on Odyssey’s list are also readily available on pirate sites. In fact, any book on any college syllabus is available. Unless you’re studying the really odd stuff, in which case, awesome! As of last night, these authors are being paid for their digital books. For the first time. That has to count for something. Every day’s delay is lost money.

  For all the promises and assertions of major publishers, they have not been able to accomplish this simple feat: paying all of their authors for their digital works. The mind boggles. They are digital aeons behind on this process, and that’s just for the rights they own free and clear. Again, every day without a legitimate paid alternative is lost money.

• Royalties: I know it’s crass to talk about money, but we are not talking about new authors realizing their artistic vision. We are talking about library titles that have (presumably) earned out advances and are making what I call bread-and-butter income for publishers. Yes, there are costs of creating a digital version, but offering a 25, 30% royalty is insulting.

  I am going o

  0 Comments on Today in Publishing: A Skirmish as of 1/1/1900
  Add a Comment

I’ve spent the past month listening and reading. I reminded myself of all the positive, cool, exciting projects happening in publishing today — and there are many (I’ve been asking those involved to post here to share what they are doing). I’ve considered what happens next, and focused a lot on what readers are saying, about books, digital and print.

Though everybody is writing about ebooks and the digital experience these days, I find I don’t have much new to add to the conversation; I’ve said it all before. Sometimes I was right, sometimes I was wrong, sometimes I evolved. I still absolutely believe that user experience is — after the content of the book — the most important place for publishing types to focus their attention.

I’ve given up on reading banal analysis and wild conjecture. I ignore anything with the word “killer” in the headline or lead. If there’s a question mark in the headline — Will the iPhone Destroy How We Cook Dinner? — I don’t even bother to click through. I presume it’s a question the writer is asking himself, not actually bothering to consider with any depth. It’s just vague punditry designed to fill the web equivalent of column inches.

That is not to say there isn’t smart analysis out there, but tea leaves from a moment in time do not predict the entire future. We spend far too much time worrying about who will “win” (what this means, nobody can say) and who will “lose” (again, what does this mean?) and what people really want. This final one annoys me the most because the pronouncements often come from those who have no idea how the technology they are praising — or dismissing — is used by real people.

Which leads me to an email I sent to my friend Melissa Klug, a book and paper aficionado. She thought she was asking for a few quick thoughts on the future of print. She got a medium-length essay (mostly reproduced below…mostly, because I cannot resist editing and revising and rethinking and updating). For those who prefer an abstract to reading long pieces, I’ll make it easy: print will remain important, but our relationship with print will change.

Print is not dead. It is not even dying, at least not yet. Think of print like an overweight beast, shedding excess weight. The result is a leaner, more defined, more beautiful experience. What we buy in print will be increasingly valuable as readers shift to the digital realm — and they are shifting so amazingly fast, it’s almost terrifying.

Print, for many types of information, will become far less important. It’s too slow for our world, too clunky for an increasing number of people. I read that a publisher is “crashing” a book on the Deepwater Horizon disaster. It’s due out in September. Given the volume of information already published and the way public interest flags, is this too long a delay? What will the book offer than other sources don’t? It’s the same relevance conundrum facing newsweeklies.

Major newspapers will continue to see diminishing print runs, but this mostly because the kind of information they provide is more easily consumed in the digital environment — it’s the old joke about reading yesterday’s news. Clay Shirky is giving newspapers fifty years. I think he is being generous.

With the Internet and television combining forces, “news” becomes more immediate. Newspapers/news publications did a horrible job of anticipating the future. They did a horrible job of understanding their own strengths. This doesn’t mean news is no longer important. It’s that these organizations seemed to miss what made them critical in the first place. We don&rsqu

In order for an organization to effectively implement and weather change, there must be an organization-wide mandate to move in a new direction. Senior management must support and model the changes they want to make. Change comes from the top, and, if the recent CEO panel at Book Expo America 2010 is any indication, that is the biggest problem facing publishing today.

There is no doubt that huge changes are facing the publishing industry. Many of these have been driven by readers and technology companies, the latter adroitly timing hardware and software to reach consumers just as their willingness to adopt ebooks was reached. Apparently, this is “radically wrong”. Well, it’s not like the publishing industry didn’t have over a decade to take control of the conversation.

I will note, before I begin ranting, that there are many leaders in publishing who both talk the talk and walk the walk. They may not like every aspect of the change they face, and they are aware that the entire industry is making it up as they go along. These leaders are on the ground, listening and responding. You know who you are, you run the companies that garner accolades from readers and your peers, and you are true leaders.

Since last Tuesday morning (also known as Day One of Book Expo America 2010), I’ve been reading variations of the following statement from David Shanks of Penguin USA. All seem to have the same gist, so I’ll go with Personanondata’s version:

D[avid] S[hanks] agreed emphatically that there will be a bigger market but we shouldn’t shouldn’t forget there needs to be big investment to buy reading devices.

This comment was made during what, by various accounts, was a frank — if not satisfactory to all who heard or read about it — debate between high level players in the publishing industry. This group, including Jonathan Galassi (Farrar Straus Giroux), Scott Turow (Authors Guild), Bob Miller (Workman Publishing), Esther Newberg (ICM), Skip Prichard (Ingram), Oren Teicher (ABA), and Shanks, revealed serious philosophical differences when it comes to issues facing their industry.

They also revealed some interesting biases. The quote above, I think, encapsulates it all. I’ll be frank: I am not convinced these CEOs fully understand the world of digital reading, and it scares me they are leading their companies into the biggest shift facing the industry since, oh, mass market paperbacks.

I get that staff handles the day-to-day work on this shift, but, as I noted in my first paragraph, change only works when there is buy-in from top management down. This buy-in needs to be reflected both internally and externally. As long as publishing leaders continue to equate “device” with ebooks, I will remain unconvinced they get what is going on in the real world. Expensive, exclusive hardware is not necessary for people to read ebooks.

Yes, it is true that some sort of hardware is required, whether it comes in the form of a phone or a tricked-out workstation. Also, some sort of software. There is also firmware.

But for every purchaser of a Kindle, nook, Kobo Reader (still waiting for my evaluation device, ahem! Seriously dudes, I have a presentation coming up in about two weeks, call me.), iPad, iPhone, whatever, there are many more readers who have existing laptops and desktops. Put another way, the vast majority of digital reading is being done via those machines. It’s happening at home and at the office. Anyone who has ever held a job that requires extensive (more than one hour!) use of a computer knows this to be true.

It seemed like Bob Miller, Oren Teicher, and Skip Pritchard got that the world was changing while Jonathan Galassi, David Shanks, and

The shifts in today’s publishing business are happening lightening fast and iceberg slow. Epiphanies strike at odd moments. Brett Sandusky had one. Below is where he ended up; read his entire post (linked below) to see how he got there.

In the end, no amount of market research, anecdotal evidence, kaffee klatsches, or cocktail parties can ever replace actual and real interaction with our customers. Recently, I attended a conference where a panelist kept repeating throughout her presentation, “The reader is the consumer who is your customer. I openly admit that, at the time, I begrudged this panelist for stating the obvious. Of course the reader is our customer.

It wasn’t until much later that I realized what she was really saying: in an age of digital books, in an age where many of this industry’s institutions are, one by one, going away or becoming irrelevant, we are no longer the industry we thought we were. And, the reality is this: we can no longer afford to act as a B-to-B business. The future, if we have one, depends on our ability to reconfigure as a B-to-C business and start interacting with readers directly free of buffers and intermediaries. From product development, to consumer feedback, to buyer-less sell-in for digital products, to direct to consumer sales, to verticality, to providing readers with what they want, a new wave of customer interaction needs to guide us along our paths to the future.

Now, do you remember that money which we took from marketing budgets slated for BEA? What if we funneled that money into establishing direct consumer contact? Think of the awesome changes we could make in place of printing thousands upon thousands of galleys that end up in the hands of someone who could get the book for free regardless.

I can only repeat these wise words, something I didn’t fully understand just a few months ago, “The reader is the consumer who is your customer.”

• The Proverbial Sex Reassignment Surgery: what this transition is really about — Brett Sandusky on the elephant in the digital transition room.

Since the announcement that HarperStudio was being shuttered and its staff, Bob Miller excepted, would be absorbed into the larger HarperCollins machine, I have been thinking about what this means for publishers. HarperStudio was a high-profile experiment that barely had time to emerge from start-up mode, much less to achieve goals great and small. From my outsider perspective, one of their greatest accomplishments was proving the effectiveness of small teams.

I may be romanticizing Studio, but it seemed to me an entity that functioned fairly autonomously within the larger HarperCollins entity. Yes, they could tap into the mighty HC machine, but the layers of bureaucracy that slow down the process were largely eliminated. Stripping away obstacles (and their associated meetings!) allows a team to focus on the book, not the potential roadblocks.

Small teams are tantalizing. Speed-to-market. The ability to innovate. Focused communication. Inexpensive experiments. Low-budget failures. Synergy. The lack of corporate baggage. Autonomy. Freedom.

The only other experiment of this nature is the on-the-verge Carina Press, Harlequin’s digital publishing start-up. From top to bottom, Carina took a different approach than Studio. Despite the different business models, both entities distinguished themselves by throwing back the curtain and exposing their business process. In an era where we are told big publishers cannot be “brands” (and, apparently, neither can editors), Carina and Studio proved the opposite.

Working fast, sharing successes, discussing next moves, addressing setbacks — Debbie Stier’s Formspring account is an awesome example of communication — and engaging readers, authors, industry observers, and even competitors…it’s nearly a textbook vision of how to work with small teams.

As the announcement that Studio was ending its experiment was being made, I was leaving the bubble of South by Southwest Interactive. After spending days with people focused on creating and doing, I wondered about the lessons publishers would take from the Studio experiment, and how publishers were going to find the skill sets they needed to take advantage of new ways to bring readers and books together.

I also wondered where the acquisitions in publishing were. It’s not hard to find interesting experiments in publishing. I would hazard that all the current innovative thinking (and doing!) we’re seeing in publishing is being done by individuals and small teams outside the industry as we know it.

(Aside: I am fascinated by the way the people behind these projects continue to knock on publishing’s doors, despite near-constant frustrations of meetings that never result in action. I would love to see more partnerships and experiments.)

Now that the iPad has landed, reality has splashed a bit of cold water on the idea that a single device can “save” an industry. The experience of reading plain text books on the iPad remains an option, but plain text books — silly page turning graphics or not — really don’t do much to leverage the technology. If anything, it highlights the fact that publishers continue to ignore the opportunities of browser-based reading systems. Oh, and that they haven’t done much to leverage that technology either.

(Man, when you think about it, there is so much potential waiting to be tapped. It’s exciting. Digital reading to date has been very much device focused — Kindle, Nook, iPad — and yet the vast majority of people engaged in this type of reading do so via PDF or browser. Imagine the impact on sales if people could, you know, access books in their preferred format.)

The chatter has moved from iBooks to multimedia, transmedia, enhanced books. These terms mean different thin

Today, we welcome the genius Brett Sandusky, chief provocateur behind Publishr, a site focused on exploring the issues behind new publishing business models and challenges. A few weeks ago, Brett announced plans for a new publishing, er, Publishng project. Today, he expands upon his vision:

Let’s start at the beginning: what is Publishr?

Publishr is many things, but first and foremost it is a blog containing a collection of essays about the future of the publishing industry as we forge ahead into what many see as uncharted territory.

Right now our industry is going through a transition from a primarily print business into an integrated business with both print and digital businesses. Yet, I saw a lot of houses entering the digital market with business plans based solely on their print business, or something eerily similar to business models that were predicated on producing a print product to sell in a bricks and mortar retail location. While this worked (more or less) for print books, I found it ludicrous that only a few were speaking out about creating purely digital business models or, at the very least, models that allowed for a digital focus which make sense for moving into the future of our industry.

In the transition that our industry is going through, there are a few steps I see happening:

1. Production of a large amount of eBooks with little regard for product quality or user experience in order to be represented in the marketplace.
2. Learning from and about the production process, eBooks in the market as well as industry “best practices”.
3. Production of second wave eBooks, with more attention paid to user-experience and quality of conversion. Addition of more devices, market expansion.
4. Learning from second wave of products in market.
5. Production of third wave eBooks, refined further, device functionality starting to be taken into account, metadata and technical strategy begins to show up on radars.
6. Learning from third wave of products in market.

Publishr strives to be at the 7th position in this (very crude) spectrum: anticipating what we’ll learn from the latest technology and then attempting to venture yet another step beyond what we perceive as the realm of current possibility.

Though they’ll likely change over time, what are your goals?

Right now, I’m focusing on establishing a foundation of quality writing about the publishing industry that covers as many topics as possible, offers solutions to future problems, and essentially, sets out a path for successful transition from a print to an integrated digital business. While I do think there is more than one way to do this, I am providing one such roadmap that I feel is entirely feasibly while still forward-thinking and adaptable.

In addition, there is the newly announced Publishng project through which we will be publishing an eBook and discussing the process throughout in a completely transparent way. The focus of this project is on learning through hands-on experimentation.

Ultimately, I would like to create a dialog about the transition in our industry as well as anticipate the challenges which will be facing as we move forward. Overall, Publishr is decidedly utopian in tone and aims to provide a positive, yet serious, look at the future of our industry from within.

What kind of business model are you envisioning?

While there are many business models that could function in the digital publishing space, I have personally advocated for one based on agility and modularity. I like to call it the XML business model because it would mirror our content, our workflow and our entire overarching structure.

Let’s say, for example, a publisher purchases or commissions a piece of content. It is then decided that this content will be divided, purposed and repurposed, chu

The Unicorn has landed, and like all mythical beasts, it has some magic powers. And like all mythical beasts, the legend may be greater than the reality. Of course, this depends on what you were expecting versus what you got. I expected that the iPad, at least initially, would be a larger, faster, more feature rich version of the iPhone/Touch, and, so far, that’s what I’ve gotten.

As app developers get their hands on the device and explore potential, I fully expect applications that rethink “computing” — we’ve seen hints of this already. It’s really hard to develop without a working device, so even those apps that were ready from Day One will be updated and reworked based on actual usage.

Overall

As I mentioned, I was expecting a pumped-up version of the iPhone, and that’s where we are right now, especially application-wise. A few apps, however, show how new thinking is being applied. The first is Omnigraffle. This diagraming tool is extremely flexible, and the iPad version shows how a company can port the desktop application into a new medium, changing how it works to support the technology. Omnigraffle is pricey: $49.99. Totally worth it for designers, developers, and people who like to sketch ideas and share thoughts in meetings. It’s the first app I’ve seen that shows how the iPad can be used as a business tool.

The Elements is a terrific example of how “enhancements” to books can work. Priced at a mere $13.99 — truly, this is a bargain! — it offers text, animation, encyclopedic information, 3D (you can order glasses from the app!), and humor. Seriously, I’ve had The Element Song as an earworm for days.

Finally, while news apps are still a work in progress, the NPR app stands out for its creative use of technology to provide information. Sound, images, text, information sharing via Facebook or Twitter (or, heck, email). You can access stories from various points in the app — via the “Topics” menu, by scrolling horizontally through stories, tapping the “More” button for synopses of top stories. Programs and stations are accessible, and, yep, you can build you own NPR playlist. There is subtle advertising included, with Bose being a sponsor. I can appreciate that.

(Note: honorable mentions go the Marvel and GoodReader [PDF] apps. I’ve only dabbled with them so far, but they work as advertised! I am looking forward to reading manga, traditional style, as well.)

These apps — and others I’m sure I’m not aware of — point to a future of creativity that will change how we work. This does not mean the iPad is a laptop/desktop killer. It’s not a Kindle killer. It’s not a [fill-in-your-favorite-technology-on-target-to-be-killed] killer. It’s a device that rethinks how we do some work, and, if anything, is a glimpse at the future.

The Good: It’s fast. Love that speed. Love the display, love the crisp elements. Love the possibility. I did get a little dizzy viewing the ABC app — definitely high definition. Typing is easy (see below). The iPad doesn’t conduct the same level of heat as a laptop, so it can be rested on bare knees or thighs. The battery life is impressive, longer than advertised.

I’m also foreseeing serious movement into man purses (or, as O’Reilly Media’s Mac Slocum put it, unicorn scabbards). Wives everywhere will rejoice as their husbands have a place to put wallets and sunglasses. Oops, did I say that?

The Bad: It’s heavy. I expect future devices will be lighter as technology improves, but it’s heavy. This means I have to consider where I’

Be careful what you ask for, because you just might get it.

Consumer expectations will rise if prices do

Over the weekend, we rode a rollercoaster as Macmillan laid out its demands for ebook pricing to Amazon, and Amazon responded by pulling (nearly) all Macmillan titles from its store. Late Sunday, Amazon announced they would “capitulate” to Macmillan’s demands on pricing. It almost goes without saying that this will be the go-forward model for all major publishers, and maybe their independent brethren as well.

Publishers have gotten what they want.

Man, it seems like a victory doesn’t it? In a way it is. I’ve been of two minds on this topic since the entire concept of the “Agency Model” was announced (rough definition below). Setting aside the fact that it’s still opaque to parties with a vested interest (authors, agents, even other retailers), I have a natural aversion to wholesalers (book publishers) forcing prices on retailers (Amazon, et al). I believe price is an important tool in the arsenal of retailers. And, as a consumer, I’m not yet willing to pay more for the vast majority of ebooks being released today. More in a few paragraphs.

On the other hand, I love that this approach (finally) levels the playing field for all retailers. Sort of. Some have argued that this battle is not about DRM, but it is all about DRM. DRM is the tool retailers use to lock in consumers. Amazon does it. Sony does it. Barnes & Noble does it. Apple does it (or rather will, in the case of books). Every retailer who has a device has a proprietary DRM scheme. And publishers encourage this. They demand DRM.

These DRM schemes lock other retailers out of the devices. They allow companies to dominate the marketplace. Why would I shop IndieBound when I can’t load the books on my preferred device? Ah, the battles on the horizon! It’s going to be a bumpy year.

And…there is a lot more elasticity in ebook prices than has been acknowledged or realized. Macmillan is talking about pricing books in a (yet-to-be-revealed) dynamic manner, ranging from $14.99 to $5.99. As Macmillan has not previously been a good actor in ebook pricing, this news is heartening. This seems like an attempt to map the existing print marketplace to the digital marketplace, when now is the time for more creativity and thought when it comes to ebooks, content presentation, and pricing — and yeah, that does mean considering higher prices (I am not contradicting what I said about what I will pay).

Publishers have made bad arguments when it comes to ebook pricing. They confuse in-house value (often based on the price paid for the book) with consumer perception of value. Now these publishers who once hid behind Amazon — seriously, I’ve had publishers blame Amazon for crappy formatting when it was clear the underlying file was the problem — will have to stand behind their product. No. They will have to produce better quality books.

This means both from story and production perspectives. It doesn’t appear publishers will make more money from retailers under the proposed Agency Model, but consumer expectations will rise if prices do. There will not be additional margin — at least not significant additional margin — to play with, but publishers will be held to a higher ebook standard.

In my Publishing Perspectives article last week, I discussed the importance of getting basics right (in a “we couldn’t have done better if we’d coordinated it” moment, at Digi

A recent meme in publishing is that some readers are exhibiting a sense of “entitlement” about buying ebooks. I’d like to humbly offer myself as Exhibit A. It is true: I feel entitled to buy books. I insist upon it, actually*.

Seriously, is it ever a good idea to disparage your customers? To treat them like they are annoyances? To suggest that they simply don’t understand how things work, when, really, why should they? Especially when, in at least one instance, the publishers were the ones who changed (or attempted to change) the rules?

So, as a person who happily pays for books, this is what I feel entitled to: the book in the format I prefer at the time my awareness in said book is sufficient that I go to make the purchase at the price I deem reasonable based on my extensive experience as a book consumer.

The truth is, I don’t care about ebook windowing (except that it’s, as far as I know, a relatively new idea, and to take readers to task for expecting simultaneous releases is a bit much, no?). I don’t care about ebook pricing games. I don’t even care how long it took the author to write the book, the amount of research that went into it, and that it was handwritten in blue ink on yellow paper. None of these things are indicators of whether or not I’m going to have an awesome reading experience.

Basically, a publisher has one chance to get my money. If the marketing is done right, my awareness of a book is raised and my interest is piqued. Depending on the book — some I want as print, some (most) I want as digital — I will then attempt a purchase. If the book is not available, based on my previous behavior, I will either buy something else or find myself distracted by other bright and shiny things. The book that brought me to the store will never be purchased, barring a secondary marketing campaign coupled with renewed want.

Here’s why. There are way more books that I want than there are books that I need. If I stopped buying books for five years, chances are I still won’t finish all the books I already own that I haven’t read. Ten years? Maybe. You probably don’t want to challenge me on that.

Today’s wanted book becomes tomorrow’s forgotten book.

I am going to be frank about pricing. My household has purchased very expensive ebooks — a practice that lead me to present on the $75 ebook at Digital Book World — and most have been worth the price paid. We’ve had a digital book subscription plan for many years, sometimes paying money for an account that isn’t accessed for months. The value assessment of books comes from the consumer, not the publisher.

My experience with well-done ebooks, those books I paid higher prices for, and the ebooks I’ve purchased from major publishers has forced me to seriously consider price when it comes to buying ebooks. I recently wrote about the need to get the basics right. Given my experiences to date, it will take some serious effort on the part of these major publishers to regain my trust in their ebook products.

When prices go above $10, I take fewer chances on books. When prices go above $10, I refuse to pay for bad experience that cheapens the story. When prices go above $10, I weigh the fact that I could get two books for approximately the price of one. Given that I am a fast and constant reader, that final point is not dismissed lightly.

So yeah, I have a sense of entitlement when it comes to purchasing books. Availability, format, price. Where I come from this type of entitlement goes by another name: customer service.

* – Given worries about piracy, I think my stance should be welcome.

As a book buyer, I have a keen interest in thriving bookstores. As a book reader, I have a keen interest in independent publishing and access to my books. And while I wait for traditional independent bookstores to transition to robust physical and online presences, I have enjoyed the emergence of digital booksellers, particularly All Romance Ebooks and its sister store, OmniLit.

Traditional PDF is the gateway drug to ebooks.

All Romance Ebooks was founded in 2006 by Barb Perfetti and Lori James. The original site, All Romance, focuses on romance novels while OmniLit sells general fiction and non-fiction. Both sites focus on what makes independent bookselling so valuable (with some modern twists, as you’ll see), and Lori James graciously succumbed to a few questions from me about her company, her customers, and her digital publishing wishlist.

Q: So, first, describe it. All Romance eBooks, OmniLit. What they are, how they fit together.

AllRomance.com is our specialty store and it primarily caters to the romance and erotica markets. OmniLit.com is a full service bookstore. Readers will find all types of fiction and non-fiction there, including all of the romance and erotica that we have at All Romance. Although they are branded differently, the two sites are integrated. Customers can access their account at either site using the same login and password and they share libraries.

Q: I’ve heard people say Amazon has cornered the ebook market, but, obviously, that’s not true. You are not only competing, but growing. Without revealing the secret sauce, what are some key ingredients?

I think in order to be successful in any industry you need to know your market, the community, and how to grow and maintain relationships. This is more than a business to us, it’s something we’re very passionate about.

Q: As a longtime ebook consumer, all I want is the ability to read the book I’ve just purchased. I am not opposed to DRM used in the right way, but your success comes from a mostly DRM-free purchasing experience. How do you convince publishers to make this (reader-friendly) move, and how do your customers react?

Although I personally prefer the ease of open format, the pragmatic part of me understands publishers need to do what they believe is going to be in the long-term interest of their business. As a reader, I want the houses to stay open and solvent enough to feed my addiction. Some publishers believe DRM helps safeguard their position. Unfortunately, it also seems to be a deterrent to the average reader. The vast majority of our customer support issues are DRM issues. The vast majority of our sales are of open format books. We do share general business statistics every year with publishers—one of which is the percentage of DRM v Non-DRM sales. I’m looking forward to Harlequin’s launch of Carina Press. I think it’s a move that’s going to be very well received by our customers.

Q: Do you think readers know what DRM is or do you think they know there’s a barrier between them and reading?

The average reader wants to make a purchase and start reading. That’s their expectation. That’s what they’ve become accustomed to in the print world. Digital can be advantageous. They don’t have to wait for their local bookstore to open or wait for the postman to arrive on their doorstep. With the click of a few buttons they can begin reading instantly—if they have the correct file type, software, etc. In my opinion anything we can do to remove barriers in the delivery system is a plus from the perspective of the reader and there are readers who consider something as simple as having to download software a barrier.

Q: How does it feel to be on the leading edge of the book ret