Books Are Not Remotely Too Expensive

I'm not sure this is the best defense of the publishing industry. That $35 ticket price for a hardcover can be avoided by buying used, renting, or an ebook (if cheaper). It's true that a physical copy grants you perpetual ownership, but the general public doesn't seem to value this that much, especially for a new copy. With the barriers to editing, formatting, promotion, and distribution never being lower, publishers need to make a better case for their form of the product other than "it's not that expensive historically."

Oh god, this argument again?! They used the same argument for video games. "Oh stop complaining about our 80$ AAA video games, because NES games would cost you 60$ back then which is a lot more than 80$ today when adjusted for inflation."

Yes we know, games and books are cheaper today when adjusted for inflation (along with stuff like phones, TVs, washing machines, etc) but you know what isn't cheaper? Everything else that's necessary for living: housing, bills, healthcare, education.

So when people today have way less disposable income at the end of the month due to the massive CoL increases, they're not gonna be swayed to buy your books or games, with the argument that when adjusted for inflation they actually cost less than in the past.

So the game and book publishers need to adapt to the new economic realities of their customers if they want to survive. You can't argue them into buying your stuff via inflation arguments, if they have less money.

Less of an issue with gaming that's self regulating now via massive losses of AAA studios and a surge of indie games but IIRC book publishing is more complex.

Normally, free market competition should fix this, but the problem is, unlike the race to the bottom TVs and washing machines, book publishing isn't always a free market but more of a cartel run by a few mafia monopolies and interest groups.

Textbooks, on the other hand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textbook#Market

> In the United States, the largest textbook publishers are [four companies]. Together they control 90% of market revenue

> Harvard economics chair James K. Stock has stated that new editions are often not about significant improvements to the content. "New editions are to a considerable extent simply another tool used by publishers and textbook authors to maintain their revenue stream, that is, to keep up prices."

> the primary factor contributing to increases in the price of textbooks has been the increased investment publishers have made in [bundled supplements e.g. one-time-use codes for a website] [...] the publishers' practice of packaging supplements with a textbook to sell as one unit limits the opportunity students have to purchase less expensive used books

I buy used books. Those prices are up too but paperbacks are usually about $8 bucks or less. That's the way to go.

I would correct that to "some books are not remotely too expensive". A practical example. Just went to my bookshelf and grabbed

Dinner in One: Exceptional & Easy One-Pan Meals: A Cookbook by Melissa Clark. It costs $15 rn. Even at $30, it’s worth the money. Why?

It’s one of the most recommended cooking books for beginners, it teaches you how to feed yourself in a simple and efficient way (one-pot or one-sheet pan or skillet or casserole dish or bowl) in a world where time has actually the most value.

It helps you to save money, and time, as you will eat less takeout, you have more control over what quality of food you actually eat, it teaches you concepts to cook dinner way beyond the hundred recipes provided, and as long as you have one pot or one sheet pan or skillet or casserole dish or bowl, you can make use of the knowledge from that book right away.

It provides actual value and a ROI that will pay back the price of the book in tasty, quick, and mostly healthy meals in no time.

The Idea Machine, on the other hand, is a luxury item. It’s the same justification perfume makers will tell you their $2 perfume is actually worth $150.

The real-world value in reading The Idea Machine is actually close to zero. Never ever did someone ask me to explain to them the concepts in there you pay $34.95 to read for.

You can’t eat the book or knowledge about the history of books. When was the last time you tried to impress someone at a party with your book knowledge about books?

Maybe in social settings where people buy monocles, but if you have monocle money, you will not even notice the dent it makes in your BlackRock portfolio.

So some books are worth the money, others are luxury items. This guy is just trying to justify his own book’s existence at $34.95, which, considered the real value of the book to the majority of humans out there, is too expensive. Not having this printed and the resources used for it, would get it closer to the value of what is written inside.

Just because the market is flooded with paperback "shit knowledge" at $30+ doesn’t justify most of that being even worth printing, or even trying to sell it at a premium. The price justifies the cost, but not the value.

But that goes for most luxury items produced by entitled people who think what they produce is revolutionary.

I have a hard time cognitively justifying most physical book purchasing anyways when internet shadow libraries have most of what I want to read.

books are too expensive when you factor in quality. Most edition today are crap, designed to look good, but be bad. Glued pages are even in "fancy" editions. And not speaking about content.

I get that many people will probably loose their jobs, but they need to adapt rather then defend a dying industry. Paper books must remain for high end editions of classics or very high demand books (category which in time coincide with classics).

Other books should be digital first, which is the most efficient medium for discovering new books by new authors, and cut costs by those authors who can easily self publish. Publishers should innovate in this direction, not by publishing thousand of crap books yearly (both in quality of paper etc. and content itself).

As my 401(k) statement once said "past performance is not an indicator of future performance". Comparing current prices to past inflation-adjusted prices has no relation to current markets, even for books.

I wonder how much is supply and demand. Hasn't the rate of reading been decreasing?

In my country they put a mandatory minimum price on books because of "muh culture". Of course they could never enforce this globally so it lead to importing cheap books from America and the UK.

Don’t gaslight consumers by blaming them for your decline in a free market. It’s also your job to make people care about books and want to buy them.