Why do publishers persist in not only selling hardback editions but doing so in advance of paperbacks? The answer seems obvious, even if it's not explicitly acknowledged by Larry Ryan in this opinion piece for the Guardian: they're a blatant money-spinner. If you want to read the book as soon as possible, then you have to be prepared to pay for the privilege.
I'll admit that hardbacks can be handsome, and can see that there's a certain amount of prestige associated with them if you're an author. But I'm generally in Ryan's camp. Hardbacks are not only off-puttingly expensive (perhaps counter-productively so - personally, I'd be inclined to buy many more books if the paperbacks were published simultaneously or first); they're also cumbersome to transport (and require the removal of the dust jacket to avoid damage) and take up additional room on shelves where space is already at a premium.
The model doesn't seem to serve consumers' interests, and ultimately that might spell its demise. But as long as publishers continue to feel it serves theirs in terms of profit and profile, it'll no doubt remain in place.
No comments:
Post a Comment