As for the the $9.99 price point, there is absolutely new competition in the marketplace. Google is (according to them) serious this time. Apple will launch new devices better suited to reading. It’s questionable that they’ll enter the bookselling marketplace. I’m not the only one who half-jokes that they don’t want to deal with publishers. But the real factor in price points is the consumer. If they won’t spend more than ten dollars for an ebook (and in some ways publishing should thank Amazon for creating this mental barrier), then who loses? There seems to be a conviction that readers will accede to publisher pricing, when the truth is that readers have choice. There are very few books I *must* have. There are many books I *want*.

And if the price I believe is reasonable coincided with the price the publisher sets, then that want will be fulfilled. I written a lot recently about the savviness of the ebook consumer. Readers are talking and making good points. Publishers aren’t listening. Not all of them anyway. Those who do, they’re responding to the people who buy and read books.

Unfortunately, with few exceptions, publishing is a business, and decisions are made with the bottom line in mind. Even if today’s big publishers fail (and I imagine there will be at least one huge implosion in our near future, though the optimistic side of me thinks things will turn around), the big business aspect of publishing will continue to be very much bottom-line oriented. Amazon is not fuzzy teddy bear (yeah, written about *that* for years as well). Neither is Google. The business is changing. Rapidly. I’ve predicted we’ll see great things from small publishers because they are better able to weather change in economics and consumer behavior.

I’ve been accused of focusing too much on digital publishing, and it’s true (I plead the Fifth on stirring pots, but, yeah, getting people worked up is part of getting them to speak up). It’s something that fascinates me on many levels. Not only for the possibility it brings to readers (one particular fascination is the fact that devices and software make it easier for disabled persons to read books. You want fury from me? Ask about the boneheaded actions of the Authors Guild to turn off text-to-speech in the Kindle 2. That killed access for so many vision and mobility impaired readers.), but also because changes in technology — and by this I mean workflow — can create cost savings for publishers.

I have a vested interest in this technology from the publisher perspective, but I have a far deeper interest as a reader. I am the child of a librarian. The child of a librarian who has, over the decades, seen budgets cut while demand for services has increased. My mother has paid for so much out of her own pocket and has worked long hours, again out of her own pocket, to make sure people can read. I am not starry-eyed about the Kindle technology (see: oh, rants against the proprietary system), but I am very hopeful that advances will help bring books to people who don’t have the kind of access I take for granted. And I do take it for granted.

As for the focusing on the negative review over the love letter? Proof you’re a writer. Now to respond to TonyA…yeah, thoughts there too.

(By the way, the blog delete policy is very simple: it’s cool to attack or argue with me, as long as said attacks are not person or egregiously offensive; it is not okay to insult other commenters. I’ve only banned one commenter since this site went online. I don’t mind dissent or debate — my mind or position can be shifted by compelling evidence — but I do mind when commenters do not offer other commenters the validity of their opinions. Given that only one person has violated this, I’d say my readers are pretty awesome.)

I’m not one who believes there will be an iPod moment for ebooks. I think it’s more likely we’ll look back in five years and see that ebooks (and ereaders) have become part of our reading mix (we’ll also see today’s technology as primitive). I prefer digital because I am in transit far more than I’d prefer. And since I’m generally in the middle of three or four books simultaneously, I like having them all with me. Oh sure, 9 times out of 10, I’ll choose the fun read over the work read, but still, it’s with me. (And the storage issue is a big one for me. It turns out there is no such thing as bookshelf fairy. I’ve checked.)

The international question is huge, and I’m curious how it will be resolved. Territorial rights were a burning topic when I started BS, and they’re going to be a burning issue in the not-too-distant future. Today’s readers simply don’t wish to adhere to restrictions that (probably) made sense in decades past, especially when the conversation goes international immediately. I get that there are issues surrounding wireless access (telephony being one of those legacy businesses that seriously impacts distribution of information) in addition to existing territorial posturing, and I worry that these stances will lead to what I think of as piracy-by-frustration.

I know publishers do consider readers as they make decisions, but I am not sure they have fully considered the long-term impact of current business decisions on a readership that recognizes different boundaries.

I do wonder about e-readers..I can’t get all worked up about them (maybe the difference between a litblogger and book blogger. but when we had one of our weekly discussion questions about e-books our international bloggers were quick to point out they wouldn’t be an option for them anytime soon. And quite frankly, apart from my longing to save storage, I also don’t have a burning desire for one. So that’s all I really have to say on that topic!

So, to dial back.

I was, initially, responding to your comments about Alexie’s comments. They have received a fair amount of attention. As I (underlined, underscored thrice) heard what he was saying, Kindle / random e-reader device is a) expensive and b) out of reach of many ***poor*** people (which I would define a little bit more expansively than the US government does but that’s splitting hairs.)

Your comments, I’m thinking, the vibe of your blog – and this is your blog, you put it up, you run it, you invest time, energy all that – is pretty clear from the images. Fanciful. Maybe?

I don’t “hate” Amazon or Kindle or any of that (or, you, just for the record: I think you’re actually very openminded and tolerant.)

What bugs the BEEJESUZ out of me – and Alexie as I understood him – is the insatiable corporate devouring of everything in its path (publishing companies that are part of corporations with exacting demands for bottom line returns, etc.) These capitalist goals are oppositional to a sustainable book culture. I don’t know about you, but as fast as I read and as many books as I bu at local book stores AT FULL RETAIL (yes, I’m that fool) and give them to friends, and etc., I still cannot individually sustain book culture.

So your comments maybe if you stepped back and reread them, they could be construed as off putting? I hate internet crack pots and, here, on post three, I have this horrible feeling I’ve just become one. However, I also hate where this country has gone, class wise. I, me, from where I sit and what I know and what I’ve lived through: the Kindle represents everything I hate about consumer culture.

I see your point about reaching as many readers as possible but I don’t see the kindle/electronic devices as being the vehicle for that. This is subjective, too: you have a kindle (I don’t) and though I’ve tried one, I cannot stand the feel of it, the way the words look, all of that.

So, about a machine, we disagree. About books, I suspect, we probably agree about a lot. If we didn’t, we’d just ignore one another.

That said, it was very difficult, being the person I am, not to have read your ***provocative*** comments and withheld a response. So, while this is your blog (delete away!), it’s also public and, if people disagree, well, oh well.

I write plays under a pseudonym and one was recently produced overseas. The reviews: a range. But – but – I found myself entirely focused on the negative, though there was one that could only be described as a love letter.

I haven’t gone into your archives, but I cannot believe this isn’t the first time you’ve stirred the pot … (Yes, smiley faces are juvenile but I actually like you. So, there. I only wish you had a preview option.)

@TonyA actually gives me the perfect off ramp from these comments. From what I know about advances & the cost of sustaining a publishing model that fits with an economy of scale, you’re right (if I’m reading you correctly), the $9.99 figure cannot sustain the acquisition & production (editorial, art, offices, all the basic stuff) and marketing that goes into producing a quality book. What you say about competition makes sense – these machines will come down in price. Whether they gather a demographic large enough to sustain them, that remains to be seen.