End of Net Book Agreement in UK
David G. Bell
Agreement, which allows publishers in the UK to set the retail price of
their books, has effectively collapsed. While this does not affect SF
imported from the USA, it has long been argued that the end of this
system would allow large chains to use their marketing muscle to get,
and sell, books at prices which would put pressure on smaller
booksellers, and threaten the profit margins on less 'popular' authors.
--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, Furry, and Punslinger..
Never criticise a farmer with your mouth full.
David Kennedy
"David G. Bell" <db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> writes:
>According to TV news this evening (26th September) the Net Book
>Agreement, which allows publishers in the UK to set the retail price of
>their books, has effectively collapsed. While this does not affect SF
>imported from the USA, it has long been argued that the end of this
>system would allow large chains to use their marketing muscle to get,
>and sell, books at prices which would put pressure on smaller
>booksellers, and threaten the profit margins on less 'popular' authors.
I have a hard enough time getting hold of some books at the moment,
so I am naturally worried that while books will get nicely cheap
I may be reduced to seeing only Jackie Collins and Jeffrey Archer
potboilers on sale.
Another thought, if book prices can float does that mean some will go
*up*?
--
David Kennedy, Queen's University of Belfast.
#include <std.disclaimers>
A^3
: In article <812143...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk>,
What it probably means is that small, local booksellers will mostly
go out of business. The only ones left will be large chains. The
downside of this is that in places (like St Andrews) with few shops,
it's likely the books will be more expensive than elsewhere, just
like almost everything else is :-(.
Oh well, time to restrict ANY book buying to visits elsewhere.
--
TTFN, A^3 ***************E-mail*a...@dcs.st-and.ac.uk*****************
***Mundus Vult Decipi****S-mail*45 Fife Park, St Andrews KY16 9UE****
****************************Tel*+44-1334-463268***+44-589-464141*****
********Home Page: <http://www-theory.cs.st-and.ac.uk/~aaa/>*********
Jim Trash
> potboilers on sale.
That's what we seem to be hearing but I also get the impression that
all the information we are being fed at the moment is so wildly
distorted as to be almost completely useless.
There are lots of vested interests all making their case and we
are left trying to make some sense of it all.
Will it mean we will no longer be able to obtain obscure titles
such as 'Ancient Babylonian Sheep Nadgering' or will these be
unaffected ?
It would probably help if we knew what profit margins the publishers
had and how much they spent and recouped on particular books and authors.
I'm sure there are some unbiased best guesses going on out there
but I'm damned if I can figure out which ones these are.
--
Jim Trash
Gary Farber
: It would probably help if we knew what profit margins the publishers
: had and how much they spent and recouped on particular books and authors.
: I'm sure there are some unbiased best guesses going on out there
: but I'm damned if I can figure out which ones these are.
I haven't seen an issue in quite some time, but I expect some generic
figures appear in THE BOOKSELLER.
--
-- Gary Farber Brooklyn, New York City
gfa...@panix.com I is another, and I am that other. -- Rimbaud
Alison Scott
> What it probably means is that small, local booksellers will mostly
> go out of business. The only ones left will be large chains. The
> downside of this is that in places (like St Andrews) with few shops,
> it's likely the books will be more expensive than elsewhere, just
> like almost everything else is :-(.
>
> Oh well, time to restrict ANY book buying to visits elsewhere.
I do get a little fed up with this. It is of course, impossible
to buy any other product in small towns, because all the shops
have closed. Countries with no net book agreement, such as the
US, only publish potboilers and the books are much more expensive
than in the UK and there's a less good range.
Yes, I should think that some of the small bookshops that
show no signs of caring a whit about bookselling, have a
stocking policy that was clearly designed as an obscure
form of devil worship, and where the only way to find a book
you want is using divining sticks, will close. What a shame.
However, discounting has caused little problem in the US, where
books are cheaper in dollars than they are in pounds in the
UK.
The Wordsworth classics range, showing that there is no good
reason to pay 5.99 for a thinnish paperback, is doing well.
I should think that people complained the same way when
Penguin started selling paperbacks for sixpence.
As for me, I failed to buy an expensive new book I wanted
yesterday, at Dillons in Trafalgar Square (a huge bookshop
in a perfect location which is nevertheless deeply crap, but
then it doesn't really have to try...) I intend to pick it
up today at Sceptre books in Walthamstow High Street, a
really good example of a small local bookshop. Which I doubt
will have any problem coping with the demise of the NBA.
--
Alison Scott ali...@fuggles.demon.co.uk
Copyright Alison Scott, 1995. All rights retained.
Jo Walton
J...@scream.demon.co.uk "Jim Trash" writes:
> > I may be reduced to seeing only Jackie Collins and Jeffrey Archer
> > potboilers on sale.
>
> That's what we seem to be hearing but I also get the impression that
> all the information we are being fed at the moment is so wildly
> distorted as to be almost completely useless.
> There are lots of vested interests all making their case and we
> are left trying to make some sense of it all.
> Will it mean we will no longer be able to obtain obscure titles
> such as 'Ancient Babylonian Sheep Nadgering' or will these be
> unaffected ?
> It would probably help if we knew what profit margins the publishers
> had and how much they spent and recouped on particular books and authors.
> I'm sure there are some unbiased best guesses going on out there
> but I'm damned if I can figure out which ones these are.
Distributors and publishers acting as their own distributors in the UK
typically give big shops and chains 60% discount, and small shops 30-40%.
These figures from ppint at Interstellar Master Traders, who now runs a small
independent SF bookshop and has worked for Hamlyn and Methuen in the past.
The figures indicate that large shops will be able to discount far more on
popular titles than small shops will.
British books are ridiculously over-priced anyway. Some days I wonder why
anyone buys any - it is cheaper for me *including postage* to get things from
the States a year earlier. I don't just mean it doesn't cost me any more than
the Uk edition (if any) I mean it actually costs less. Yellow page-edges are a
small price to pay, and anyway that is getting less frequent.
I suspect that less titles will end up being published in Britain, and US
imports will increase - whether legally or quasi-illegally as now. (It's not
legal to import a book for which the British rights are owned by someone else -
but importers don't check. So you can have the situation where, for instance,
two copies of the same book can sit on the shelf with different covers, the US
one a pound cheaper. Sometimes people pay more for the UK cover. _Doomsday
Book_, _Fall of Hyperion_.) The people who suffer won't be us - we know about
specialist shops, we're online and can get things from the US. The people who
suffer will be people like me when I was 15, living in a cultural desert and
making end-of-term expeditions to Lears and Chapter and Verse in Cardiff.
I suspect shops like that will either vanish or be absorbed by chains and have
a much smaller supply of titles.
Support specialist bookshops - if you can afford to.
--
Jo
***************************************************
- - I kissed a kif at Kefk - -
***************************************************
Steve Brewster
[re: the collapse of the UK Net Book Agreement]
: I suspect that less titles will end up being published in Britain, and US
: imports will increase - whether legally or quasi-illegally as now. (It's not
: legal to import a book for which the British rights are owned by someone else -
: but importers don't check. So you can have the situation where, for instance,
: two copies of the same book can sit on the shelf with different covers, the US
: one a pound cheaper. Sometimes people pay more for the UK cover. _Doomsday
: Book_, _Fall of Hyperion_.) The people who suffer won't be us - we know about
And this situation could soon get very interesting, given that increasing
numbers of books will be in the public domain in the US while still in
copyright in Britain (because of the new EU 70-year rule). Can't wait
for next year's dodgily-imported cheapo editions of H.G. Wells...
--
Steve.B...@Bristol.ac.uk http://zeus.bris.ac.uk/~masjb
Room 1.19a, School of Mathematics, University of Bristol, City and
County of Bristol, BS8 1TW, United Kingdom. Tel: 0117 928 7445
Steve Glover
>And this situation could soon get very interesting, given that increasing
>numbers of books will be in the public domain in the US while still in
>copyright in Britain (because of the new EU 70-year rule). Can't wait
>for next year's dodgily-imported cheapo editions of H.G. Wells...
Ummm... I'm fairly sure you'll find that nothing went *back* into
copyright once it had been out. Certain publishers and estates would
like folk to think so, though...
Steve
Steve Glover, who may finally have got the offline reader
cracked...
David G. Bell
j...@sys.uea.ac.uk "Richard Kennaway" writes:
> I was speaking to a small bookseller a few days ago, and asked him what
> it was all about. He suggested that the only price cuts there would be
> in the short term would be new hardback fiction, which people aren't
> buying because it's absurdly expensive. However (he continued) the end
> of the NBA was being hyped by the big booksellers as a way of drawing
> extra customers in. By the time the customers have figured out that most
> of the books are no cheaper in the big bookshops than in the small ones,
> who knows how much trade the small shops will have lost? -- and in the
> run-up to Christmas too. So (he concluded) everyone is just waiting to
> see what happens.
This looks very likely. So far, the only books being sold a lower
prices are the Booker Prize shortlist -- expensive hardbacks which
often, even with the hype associated with the contest, turn out to have
very limited sales.
David G. Bell
T...@greenoak.demon.co.uk "Tom Burke" writes:
> My guess, FWIW, is that "genre" fiction will be relatively unaffected; so we
> should be OK.
>
> I think the likely problem will be for straight novels - it'll be much harder
> for the next Salman Rushdie or Timothy Mo to get published at first, because
> books) - only if that one does well will they get some money for subsequent
> books.
If it stopped some of the ridiculous advances on royalties it would be
something. I find it hard to imagine some books ever making a profit.
Remember that Tolkien did a deal for a share of the profits on The Lord
of The Rings. It was seen at the time as a gamble, and the contract was
very unusual, though it had been more common in the past.
Then again, that deal was done at a time when business integrity still
seemed to mean something. I'm not sure I would trust some modern
publishing companies to be honest about the profits from a particular
book.
Jim Trash
> copyright once it had been out. Certain publishers and estates would
> like folk to think so, though...
Well, HG Wells won't need to go back into copyright as his 50 years
isn't up until next year.
As for others such as Joyce, I thought this was all still up in the
air as to whether they'll go back. I suspect they probably won't
or there will be an amnesty given to the existing publications
published whilst they were out of copyright.
--
Jim Trash
Richard Kennaway
it was all about. He suggested that the only price cuts there would be
in the short term would be new hardback fiction, which people aren't
buying because it's absurdly expensive. However (he continued) the end
of the NBA was being hyped by the big booksellers as a way of drawing
extra customers in. By the time the customers have figured out that most
of the books are no cheaper in the big bookshops than in the small ones,
who knows how much trade the small shops will have lost? -- and in the
run-up to Christmas too. So (he concluded) everyone is just waiting to
see what happens.
___
\X/ Richard Kennaway, j...@sys.uea.ac.uk, http://www.sys.uea.ac.uk/~jrk/
School of Information Systems, Univ. of East Anglia, Norwich
Holger Hellmuth
>have closed. Countries with no net book agreement, such as the
>US, only publish potboilers and the books are much more expensive
>than in the UK and there's a less good range.
Does the US really have no such thing ? Or is it only for
paperbacks ? At least on all the US paperbacks I know there's
a price printed on the cover or back cover, so this seems to
indicate a sort of net book agreement, right ?
Holger
--
Holger Hellmuth at Uni Karlsruhe
<hell...@ira.uka.de>
david carlton
>> I suspect that less titles will end up being published in Britain,
>> and US imports will increase - whether legally or quasi-illegally
>> as now.
Isn't the whole worldwide publishing scene supposed to change soon
because of GATT, so US publishers will be able to sell books in the UK
and vice-versa? Anybody know when that's supposed to happen? Of
course, the publishers will still have to get the rights to sell in
the other country, but it could lead to big changes eventually.
> And this situation could soon get very interesting, given that
> increasing numbers of books will be in the public domain in the US
> while still in copyright in Britain (because of the new EU 70-year
> rule). Can't wait for next year's dodgily-imported cheapo editions
> of H.G. Wells...
I heard that the US was going to change its copyright law to match the
new EC rule. I don't know if that has actually happened, though.
david carlton
car...@math.mit.edu
Is this going to involve RAW human ecstasy?
Richard Treitel
dc...@qub.ac.uk (David Kennedy) writes:
>In article <812143...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk>,
> "David G. Bell" <db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>According to TV news this evening (26th September) the Net Book
>>Agreement, which allows publishers in the UK to set the retail price of
>>their books, has effectively collapsed. While this does not affect SF
>>imported from the USA, it has long been argued that the end of this
>>system would allow large chains to use their marketing muscle to get,
>>and sell, books at prices which would put pressure on smaller
>>booksellers, and threaten the profit margins on less 'popular' authors.
Well, in the U.S. there are chains that offer discounts of, say, 30%
on hardbacks and best-selling paperbacks. But smaller shops still
exist; the net result is that in books, as in food and clothes, you
pay more if you want quality. And why not?
-- Richard
"Some magics *are* distinguishable from any advanced technology."
(If my employer holds these views, it hasn't told me.)
Bob Goudreau
: I do get a little fed up with this. It is of course, impossible
: to buy any other product in small towns, because all the shops
: have closed. Countries with no net book agreement, such as the
: US, only publish potboilers and the books are much more expensive
: than in the UK and there's a less good range.
...
: However, discounting has caused little problem in the US, where
: books are cheaper in dollars than they are in pounds in the
: UK.
How do you reconcile your two statements, namely that books in the US
are allegedly both "much more expensive than in the UK" and yet
"cheaper in dollars than they are in pounds in the UK"?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation
goud...@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive
+1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA
Graham Head
db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk "David G. Bell" writes:
>
>[Snip]. So far, the only books being sold a lower
> prices are the Booker Prize shortlist -- expensive hardbacks which
> often, even with the hype associated with the contest, turn out to have
> very limited sales.
>
Not strictly true. Other hardbacks in the 'bestseller' category, such
as Robert Harris's _Enigma_ are also being discounted (in some places by as
much as 50%).
--
Graham
Steve Glover
Jim Trash <J...@scream.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Well, HG Wells won't need to go back into copyright as his 50 years
>isn't up until next year.
Well, someone seems to have jumped the gun. I've a CDRom with a
selection of Project Gutenberg books on it, including The War of the
Worlds...
>As for others such as Joyce, I thought this was all still up in the
>air as to whether they'll go back. I suspect they probably won't
>or there will be an amnesty given to the existing publications
>published whilst they were out of copyright.
All sounds rather complicated...
Steve
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Soliciting for November issue of Etranger: topics include morality in
works of people called Smith or about people called Smith; net stuff of likely
interest to SF fans, art... Deadline 15-OCT-1995: kur...@tardis.ed.ac.uk
Steve Glover
David G. Bell <db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Remember that Tolkien did a deal for a share of the profits on The Lord
>of The Rings. It was seen at the time as a gamble, and the contract was
>very unusual, though it had been more common in the past.
Whatever became of AP Herbert's brilliant idea of making a bet with
his publisher that the book would/would not sell a certain number of
copies -- thereby immediately and legally avoiding taxes...
>Then again, that deal was done at a time when business integrity still
>seemed to mean something. I'm not sure I would trust some modern
>publishing companies to be honest about the profits from a particular
>book.
Ah. That's what happened. Payment of gambling debts isn't legally
enforceable.
P Nielsen Hayden
>A worse blow to book publishing in the U.S., to my mind, seems to
>have been the restructuring, some years back, of the system of
>taxing inventory on hand, which made warehousing books a liability.
>Because of that (or so I understand) the industry practice is to let hard
>cover books go out of print after a year on the shelves, with some
>few exceptions. This leads to a lot of very cheap books on the remainder
>tables, which is nice, but also means that if you see something you're
>interested in, and don't snap it up right away, you could be in for quite
>a search later on...
You're thinking of the Thor Power Tools tax decision, which was indeed a
pain in the ass for publishers and didn't make keeping inventory any easier.
However, in a weird bit of urban legendry, it has come to be blamed for just
about everything imperfect and unsatisfactory in modern publishing, far out
of proportion to its particular effects. For instance, the overwhelming
majority of hardcovers -- fiction and popular nonfiction -- have always gone
OP after a year or two, certainly since the dawn of the softover era.
Blaming it on Thor Power Tools is a bit over the top.
-----
Patrick Nielsen Hayden : p...@tor.com : opinions mine
http://www.panix.com/~pnh : http://www.tor.com
Steve Brewster
: In article <812667...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk>
Has anyone seen Iain Banks's _Whit_ discounted anywhere? It's the one
book on the hardback bestseller list that I'd actually rather like to
have...
On the matter of small booksellers and the Net Book Agreement: while I'm
usually sympathetic to the problems of small traders faced with the
monopolistic practices of big chain stores, I can't help remembering that
in the days before Dillons (RIP) and Waterstone's came to Leeds, there
wasn't a single decent bookstore in the whole bloody city.
Evelyn C. Leeper
Bob Goudreau <goud...@dg-rtp.dg.com> wrote:
> Alison Scott (Ali...@fuggles.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>
> : I do get a little fed up with this. It is of course, impossible
> : to buy any other product in small towns, because all the shops
> : have closed. Countries with no net book agreement, such as the
> : US, only publish potboilers and the books are much more expensive
> : than in the UK and there's a less good range.
> ...
> : However, discounting has caused little problem in the US, where
> : books are cheaper in dollars than they are in pounds in the
> : UK.
>
> How do you reconcile your two statements, namely that books in the US
> are allegedly both "much more expensive than in the UK" and yet
> "cheaper in dollars than they are in pounds in the UK"?
Because the first paragraph quoted was sarcasm, and the second wasn't. The
elided section [...] had the transition.
--
Evelyn C. Leeper | +1 908 957 2070 | Evelyn...@att.com
Sometimes I have intermittent problems, and sometimes I don't.
Elisabeth Carey
>And this situation could soon get very interesting, given that increasing
>numbers of books will be in the public domain in the US while still in
>copyright in Britain (because of the new EU 70-year rule). Can't wait
>for next year's dodgily-imported cheapo editions of H.G. Wells...
It's not going to work that way. United States copyright law has been
changed to bring it into compliance with, at least, all of the other
countries that bother to enforce copyright. While I'm not sure H.G.
Wells is affected [has he been dead fifty years yet?], things will be\
going back under copyright over here, too.
/s/ Elisabeth Carey
Jim Trash
> >isn't up until next year.
>
> Well, someone seems to have jumped the gun. I've a CDRom with a
> selection of Project Gutenberg books on it, including The War of the
> Worlds...
Yes, I figured there was something like that about as, when I
had the bulletin board open people kept uploading H.G. Wells stories
they had as text files and being quite adamant that they must be
out of copyright as they were on CDRom.
Maybe someone here can tell us but I suspect the situation is (or rather
was) a little different in the US as regards copyright so they
may have been fine over there.
Isn't there something about having to re-assert copyright every 25 years ?
> All sounds rather complicated...
From what people have been saying on here it looks like getting more
complicated in one way and simpler in another if the US is coming into
line with the EC 70 year law.
--
Jim Trash
Elisabeth Carey
>Alison Scott <Ali...@fuggles.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
>>have closed. Countries with no net book agreement, such as the
>>US, only publish potboilers and the books are much more expensive
>>than in the UK and there's a less good range.
>
>paperbacks ? At least on all the US paperbacks I know there's
>a price printed on the cover or back cover, so this seems to
>indicate a sort of net book agreement, right ?
No, these days what it represents is a pious hope on the part of the
publisher.:)
Seriously, the price printed on the cover of a book represents the price
that the publisher is discounting off of when selling to bookstores or
distributors, and the price the author is getting a percentage of.
Nothing _requires_ the bookstore to sell it for that price, if the
bookseller finds it possible to make an acceptable profit while selling
for less. _All_ the major bookstore chains do discounting. Barnes &
Noble discounts all hardcovers 20%, and bestsellers 30%. Borders
discounts all hardcovers 10% and bestsellers 30%. Both chains discount
selected "staff recommended" titles 30% as well. Royal also discounts
heavily, though I'm not sure exactly what their policy is - both
Borders and Barnes & Noble have stores more convenient to me.
Waldenbooks and B.Dalton's theoretically sell books for full cover
price, but if you buy a discount card for $10.00, you get 10% off of
all books, hardcover and paperback, and Waldenbooks adds a $5 coupon
each time your purchases total $100, so effectively it's 15%. It's a
pretty good deal if you buy lots of books. I tend to buy hardcovers at
Borders or Barnes & Noble, and paperbacks at Waldenbooks.
And in addition, many retail chains other than the bookstores, such as
Walmart's or Caldor's, also sell some books, also discounted, and the
discount clubs such as Sam's Club or B.J.'s discount _heavily_, 30% or
40%. Of course, in the non-book stores, you rarely get much besides
bestsellers and potboilers, but that was true _before_ the advent of
heavy and widespread discounting in bookselling.
Independent bookstores tend not to discount as much, but often discount
the bestsellers, and I do know at least one independent, with both
breadth and depth of selection, that gives 10% on all paperbacks, and
15% on all hardcovers.
So even though there's a price printed on the cover, no one pays that
price unless they either don't know how to shop for books, or live in
an area that's exceptionally poorly served, or are shopping for a very
specialized title that's only carried in a highly specialized
bookstore.
And it should be noted that both Borders and Barnes & Noble carry a far
broader selection than would be expected from the stereotypical image
of monster chains focussed solely on high-volume sales, and they both
deal with small presses.
Hmmm.
I think what I started out to say was, No, there's no net book agreement
in the USA. I seem to have been a bit long-winded about it.:)
/s/ Elisabeth Carey
MR K P SCHUPKE
>In article <44qdv0$5...@dg-rtp.dg.com>,
>Bob Goudreau <goud...@dg-rtp.dg.com> wrote:
>> Alison Scott (Ali...@fuggles.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>>
>> : I do get a little fed up with this. It is of course, impossible
>> : to buy any other product in small towns, because all the shops
>> : US, only publish potboilers and the books are much more expensive
>> : than in the UK and there's a less good range.
>> : However, discounting has caused little problem in the US, where
>> : books are cheaper in dollars than they are in pounds in the
>> : UK.
>>
>> How do you reconcile your two statements, namely that books in the US
>> are allegedly both "much more expensive than in the UK" and yet
>> "cheaper in dollars than they are in pounds in the UK"?
>
>Because the first paragraph quoted was sarcasm, and the second wasn't. The
>elided section [...] had the transition.
I thought it was because books are deeply expensive in the UK.
If a book costs n.99 dollars in the US, it will often sell for n.99 pounds
or even n+1.99 pounds in the UK, as opposed to the (approx) 0.7 x n.99 pounds
you might expect from the rate of exchange between pounds and dollars.
Thus, books are "cheaper in dollars than they are in pounds in the UK" in
that you can buy a book for fewer dollars than you can pounds.
Just my 1.3p worth...
Bug
Bernard Peek
kur...@tardis.ed.ac.uk "Steve Glover" writes:
> In article <812665...@scream.demon.co.uk>,
> Jim Trash <J...@scream.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Well, HG Wells won't need to go back into copyright as his 50 years
> >isn't up until next year.
>
> Well, someone seems to have jumped the gun. I've a CDRom with a
> selection of Project Gutenberg books on it, including The War of the
> Worlds...
Some of the shareware/freeware disks have Jules Verne translations on
them. I'm told that the English translations of Verne aren't out of
the 50 year copyright yet.
--
Bernard Peek
I.T and Management Development Trainer to the Cognoscenti
b...@intersec.demon.co.uk
David G. Bell
Gra...@nunhead.demon.co.uk "Graham Head" writes:
> In article <812667...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk>
> db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk "David G. Bell" writes:
>
> >
> >[Snip]. So far, the only books being sold a lower
> > prices are the Booker Prize shortlist -- expensive hardbacks which
> > often, even with the hype associated with the contest, turn out to have
> > very limited sales.
> >
>
> Not strictly true. Other hardbacks in the 'bestseller' category, such
> as Robert Harris's _Enigma_ are also being discounted (in some places by as
> much as 50%).
All I noticed were the Bookers -- but I sometimes wonder who decides
what a 'bestseller' os before anyone starts selling it. But _Enigma_
must have been out for a week or two now.
David G. Bell
J...@scream.demon.co.uk "Jim Trash" writes:
> From what people have been saying on here it looks like getting more
> complicated in one way and simpler in another if the US is coming into
> line with the EC 70 year law.
Isn't the principle that the Berne Copyright Convention sets a _minimum_
standard which all the signatories enforce?
That is, the USA had to amend its law to provide the automatic copyright
for 50 years, and all the signatories would then recognise a US
copyright as having priority over a later copyright claim locally.
If so, the longer EC copyright period wouldn't necessarily have any
effect elsewhere.
Gary Farber
: All I noticed were the Bookers -- but I sometimes wonder who decides
: what a 'bestseller' os before anyone starts selling it. But _Enigma_
: must have been out for a week or two now.
Different lists are compiled in different ways, and this can be quite
controversial, but it's often done from bookstore advance orders, not
point-of-purchase sales.
--
-- Gary Farber Brooklyn, New York City
gfa...@panix.com I is another, and I am that other. -- Rimbaud
Elisabeth Carey
>How do you reconcile your two statements, namely that books in the US
>are allegedly both "much more expensive than in the UK" and yet
>"cheaper in dollars than they are in pounds in the UK"?
I have a strong suspicion that Allison was employing the rhetorical
device known as "sarcasm" in the first paragraph, and then reverting to
more mundane description of the _facts_ in the second paragraph.
Just a guess.:)
/s/ Elisabeth Carey
Ulrika O'Brien
>You're thinking of the Thor Power Tools tax decision, which was indeed a
>pain in the ass for publishers and didn't make keeping inventory any easier.
>However, in a weird bit of urban legendry, it has come to be blamed for just
>about everything imperfect and unsatisfactory in modern publishing, far out
>of proportion to its particular effects. For instance, the overwhelming
>majority of hardcovers -- fiction and popular nonfiction -- have always gone
>OP after a year or two, certainly since the dawn of the softover era.
>Blaming it on Thor Power Tools is a bit over the top.
You're right in that I may have been jumping to an unwarranted
conclusion, but it does seem to me that the number of stores
that feature, or specialize in, remaindered book sales, has
gone up enormously since about that time. Maybe it's unrelated
and merely contemporaneous.
--Ulrika
--
Putting the 'fun' back in 'dysfunctional'.
Ulrika O'Brien *** ulr...@aol.com
Peter Greenham
> British books are ridiculously over-priced anyway. Some days I wonder why
> anyone buys any - it is cheaper for me *including postage* to get things from
> the States a year earlier. I don't just mean it doesn't cost me any more than
> the Uk edition (if any) I mean it actually costs less. Yellow page-edges are a
> small price to pay, and anyway that is getting less frequent.
Why *do* they have yellow edges anyway?
--
Peter Greenham
Ulrika
Goudreau) writes:
>
>How do you reconcile your two statements, namely that books in the US
>are allegedly both "much more expensive than in the UK" and yet
>"cheaper in dollars than they are in pounds in the UK"?
Easy enough. The former statement was sarcastic and ironic,
the latter was not.
--Ulrika
R.Downing
>are allegedly both "much more expensive than in the UK" and yet
>"cheaper in dollars than they are in pounds in the UK"?
The Ships Of Earth By Orson Scott Card
US Price=$5.99
UK Price=#5.99
Ok so the prices are numerically the same but when you realise
that when $5.99 is converted to pounds sterling (divide by 1. 5)
you get 4 pounds(well 3.993333333) which is 1.99 cheaper thats a
THIRD of the cost of the book?
Rik
*getting prepared to get blown out of the water!*
__
_a' /( <. cs5...@wlv.ac.uk
_}\ \( _ ) Rik Downing BSc (Did Olympic 192m in 42.33sec!)
\(._(.)' BSc Applied Chemistry (Hons)
._>. _>. Currently Reading:The Ships Of Earth
And thus God spake unto Moses the eleventh commendment,
"Thou shalt leave room for thine pudding"
http://www.wlv.ac.uk/~cs5021 - Try Me! Any Suggestions gladly appreciated
Patricia C. Wrede
>>A worse blow to book publishing in the U.S., to my mind, seems to
>>have been the restructuring, some years back, of the system of
>>taxing inventory on hand, which made warehousing books a liability.
You're talking about the Thor Power Tools tax decision, and contrary to
an enormous amount of misinformation, it does *not* put a tax on
inventory-on-hand. What it did was to make the requirements for *writing
off* inventory (and thus obtaining a tax *deduction*) more stringent.
This may seem like a picky technical distinction, but I used to be an
accountant, so I'm into picky technical distinctions.
Cmcdonough
(david carlton) writes:
>
>I heard that the US was going to change its copyright law to match the
>new EC rule. I don't know if that has actually happened, though.
>
Where did you hear this? I doubt that it's true, though.
/s/ Craig McDonough
kbl...@genie.com
Peter,
Very few paperbacks are printed on acid-free paper. High humidity
and/or water leakage during shipping, combined with time, will
cause the paper to yellow. Since the edges are most exposed, they
yellow first.
I've noticed that this is far less of a problem in Colorado, where
I now live, than it was in D.C. I guess reducing average humidity
from 40%+ down to 10% makes a difference which is noticeable in
only four years.
Kent
Nancy Lebovitz
Steve Glover <kur...@tardis.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>>Remember that Tolkien did a deal for a share of the profits on The Lord
>>of The Rings. It was seen at the time as a gamble, and the contract was
>>very unusual, though it had been more common in the past.
>
>>seemed to mean something. I'm not sure I would trust some modern
>>publishing companies to be honest about the profits from a particular
>>book.
I have a vague idea that's the reason why people in the movie industry
contract for a share of the gross rather than a share of the profits.
Nancy Lebovitz (nan...@universe.digex.net)
NEW EDITION of the calligraphic button catalogue available by email!
G Bell
>Jim Trash (J...@scream.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>: It would probably help if we knew what profit margins the publishers
>: had and how much they spent and recouped on particular books and authors.
>: I'm sure there are some unbiased best guesses going on out there
>: but I'm damned if I can figure out which ones these are.
>I haven't seen an issue in quite some time, but I expect some generic
>figures appear in THE BOOKSELLER.
Basically the publisher gets about (UKPounds) 5.25, the author gets
about (UKPounds) 2.50 with bookseller getting (UKPounds) 8.25. What the
breaking of the Net Book Agreement means is that booksellers and
publishers can take a smaller cut of the revenue from each unit sold but
by making them cheaper and make up the loss by selling more copies. As far
as I can see there has not been blanket discounting only Crichton's The
Lost World and the a few others with stickers offering (UKPounds)4.00
of the cover price. What has been proved is that things like ST and SW
hardbacks have sold very well because they were only (UKPounds) 9.99.
And frankly as a purchaser I have been put off having to pay up to 16.99
for a hardback just to subsidise vast payments to authors I have no
intention of reading, Jeffrey Archer ... et al.
Graham
David G. Bell
nan...@universe.digex.net "Nancy Lebovitz" writes:
> In article <44r07d$k...@k9.tardis.ed.ac.uk>,
> Steve Glover <kur...@tardis.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >
> >>Remember that Tolkien did a deal for a share of the profits on The Lord
> >>of The Rings. It was seen at the time as a gamble, and the contract was
> >>very unusual, though it had been more common in the past.
> >
> >>Then again, that deal was done at a time when business integrity still
> >>seemed to mean something. I'm not sure I would trust some modern
> >>publishing companies to be honest about the profits from a particular
> >>book.
The extra level of quoting has an attribution missed -- I gave the
example.
> I have a vague idea that's the reason why people in the movie industry
> contract for a share of the gross rather than a share of the profits.
I've seen reports of court cases over what sounds like _very_ creative
accounting in Hollywood.
A share of the gross is, of course, much the same as standard royalties,
at least in situations where retail and wholesale prices are consistent.
Vicke Dovheden
Jo Walton <J...@kenjo.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <812503...@scream.demon.co.uk>
> J...@scream.demon.co.uk "Jim Trash" writes:
[munch]
>British books are ridiculously over-priced anyway. Some days I wonder why
>anyone buys any - it is cheaper for me *including postage* to get things from
>the States a year earlier. I don't just mean it doesn't cost me any more than
>the Uk edition (if any) I mean it actually costs less. Yellow page-edges are a
>small price to pay, and anyway that is getting less frequent.
>
I'm amazed at this revelation. Here I've been blazing along, celebrating UK
as *the* country with low book prices. If I'm not totally wrong, you (i.e.
UK)
don't have any VAT (or nearest analog) on books! And that is really a
wonder
to pray for. If I want to buy books cheap, and fairly fast, I order them
from
UK. Since our entry into EU the rule is that you (as a private person; not
for companies) pay the VAT in the country of the merchandise's origin, and
since UK has none: presto! Mostly I get away with something like 1/2 to 3/4
of the price of the same book here in Sweden. The Swedish book chains have
a
firm grip on the market, and the prizing, which often means profit margins
of 50 to 100 % :-(
>
>Support specialist bookshops - if you can afford to.
>
I try to, when my financial situation allows me. There is no substitute
for good, friendly, service.
Vicke
Jennifer Barber
Elisabeth Carey <ca...@biovax.dnet.basf-ag.de> writes:
> for less. _All_ the major bookstore chains do discounting. Barnes &
> Noble discounts all hardcovers 20%, and bestsellers 30%. Borders
Not necessarily. It depends on which part of the country the B&N is
located in. For example, the ones in Atlanta discount 10% off
hardcovers, 20% off paperback bestsellers, and 30% off hardcover
bestsellers and staff recommendations.
Seth Breidbart
MR K P SCHUPKE <b...@ee.ic.ac.uk> wrote:
>I thought it was because books are deeply expensive in the UK.
>
>If a book costs n.99 dollars in the US, it will often sell for n.99 pounds
>or even n+1.99 pounds in the UK, as opposed to the (approx) 0.7 x n.99 pounds
>you might expect from the rate of exchange between pounds and dollars.
>
>Thus, books are "cheaper in dollars than they are in pounds in the UK" in
>that you can buy a book for fewer dollars than you can pounds.
That's only for books imported from the US. Comparing books that have
been published in both places, I'd say that the list price is roughly
the same; the US adds sales tax and subtracts a discount, so (prior to
the demise of the NBA) the US gets books cheaper.
Seth
david carlton
> And frankly as a purchaser I have been put off having to pay up to
> 16.99 for a hardback just to subsidise vast payments to authors I
> have no intention of reading, Jeffrey Archer ... et al.
I'm confused. Why would you consider a hardback at any price that you
have no intention of reading?
david carlton
car...@math.mit.edu
Okay.. I'm going home to write the ``I HATE RUBIK's CUBE
HANDBOOK FOR DEAD CAT LOVERS''..
R.Downing
Jay "Thierry" Han <h...@imag.fr> wrote:
>When you divide something by 1.5 you usually get one third off...
>However, have you counted taxes?
>
>:-)
well the uk book has no additional taxes added. If there are
additional market taxes when you purchase the book then add
those as appropriate. But unless the additional tax is greater
than 50% then the US books are cheaper (i also suppose there are
some import dues that could be considered but if the the books
come as boxed (i.e say 100 a box) then the shipping cost is only
at one-hundredth of the original shipping cost (gee! isn't my
maths good! ) rather than per individual book. Even if we say
extra tax is less than 2 pounds per book then the US book is
cheaper If More (VERY unlikely) then the UK book is cheaper
Rik
Michael Stemper
: >have closed. Countries with no net book agreement, such as the
: >US,
: Does the US really have no such thing ?
That's right. There is no such thing (net book agreement) in the
US. Such a thing is referred to variously as "price fixing" or
"restraint of trade". It is highly illegal.
When I first heard about the UK's net book agreement, I was
surprised to find out that not only was such a thing legal
there, but that it could actually be enforced.
: Or is it only for
: paperbacks ? At least on all the US paperbacks I know there's
: a price printed on the cover or back cover, so this seems to
: indicate a sort of net book agreement, right ?
Nope. That's referred to as "Manufacturer's Suggested Retail
Price" (MSRP). Having an MSRP is OK, as long as it's made
very clear that retailers are under no obligation to charge
that price.
Almost every bookstore will discount (typically 10%) off of
MSRP. If you have to buy a book in an airport or drug store
(chemist to you), you'll end up paying list price (the common
term for MSRP).
Just about everything (not just books) has an MSRP. But, nobody
pays list for anything if they can avoid it.
Mike
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
mste...@empros.com
P Nielsen Hayden
>>You're thinking of the Thor Power Tools tax decision, which was indeed a
>>pain in the ass for publishers and didn't make keeping inventory any easier.
>>However, in a weird bit of urban legendry, it has come to be blamed for just
>>about everything imperfect and unsatisfactory in modern publishing, far out
>>of proportion to its particular effects. For instance, the overwhelming
>>majority of hardcovers -- fiction and popular nonfiction -- have always gone
>>OP after a year or two, certainly since the dawn of the softover era.
>>Blaming it on Thor Power Tools is a bit over the top.
>And, since hardcover print-runs are *much* shorter, in the
>main, than paperback runs, TPT is probably more to blame for the
>mass-pulping of softcovers and the brevity of paperback
>shelf-life than anything to do with hardcovers. All
>Brunvandian overkill aside, I *do* think you can lay the blame
>for the winnowing of the mid- and backlists at TPT's feet.
You can if you like, but you're mistaken.
I could write a long post about all the things over the last fifteen years
that have much more directly affected the paperback returns situation
-- boom and bust in shopping-mall development, the rise of "major author
distribution" as the governing paradigm in the IDs, sheer overcrowding on
the racks -- but I have to admit that your technique of argument-by-
assertion doesn't make me feel it's worth bothering with. Rather, I think
it's incumbent on you to tell _us_ why you think we "can lay the blame for
the winnowing of the mid- and backlists at TPT's feet." Since you're an
expert, why don't you tell us how it is that TPT is more to blame than these
other factors?
-----
Patrick Nielsen Hayden : p...@tor.com : opinions mine
http://www.panix.com/~pnh : http://www.tor.com
Seth Breidbart
>Whatever became of AP Herbert's brilliant idea of making a bet with
>his publisher that the book would/would not sell a certain number of
>copies -- thereby immediately and legally avoiding taxes...
In the US, gambling income is fully taxable.
>Ah. That's what happened. Payment of gambling debts isn't legally
>enforceable.
However, there are ways around that (e.g. put the money is escrow
first).
Seth
david carlton
> In article <CARLTON.95...@runge.mit.edu>, car...@runge.mit.edu
> (david carlton) writes:
>> I heard that the US was going to change its copyright law to match
>> the new EC rule. I don't know if that has actually happened,
>> though.
> Where did you hear this?
Somebody posted on gnu.misc.discuss about a bill designed to extend
the life of US copyrights, with the stated justification being to
bring US law in harmony with EC law. That was maybe a month ago; I
haven't heard anything about it since.
> I doubt that it's true, though.
Why?
david carlton
car...@math.mit.edu
With YOU, I can be MYSELF.. We don't NEED Dan Rather..
Christian Weisgerber
> Why *do* they have yellow edges anyway?
Paperbacks are produced very cheaply, printed on whatever paper is the
most readily and cheaply available. It is possible that the paper type
throughout a print run changes and that the different kinds of paper
have slightly different colors. You won't notice this from page to page,
but it's obvious at the edges and kind of ugly. That's why the edges are
dyed to a uniform yellow.
Or that's the original reason behind it. Nowadays, it's probably done
more for tradition than for any practical purpose. Actually, does
anybody apart from DAW still use this practice?
BTW, I have a 1984 DAW paperback where, at the edges, you can see the
different kinds of paper used despite the yellow dye. ;-)
--
Christian 'naddy' Weisgerber na...@mips.pfalz.de
See another pointless homepage at http://www.rhein-neckar.de/~mips/.
-- currently reading: Philip José Farmer, A Private Cosmos --
Daniel Blum
I have a Del Rey paperback (from about 1990 or so) which SHOULD have had
yellow dye used on it, as it is obviously made from two different
batches of paper. One is darker than the other, and the signatures
are arranged dark-light-dark-light-dark. The stripes are quite
visible, and look pretty darn silly :).
--
_______________________________________________________________________
Dan Blum to...@mcs.com
"I wouldn't have believed it myself if I hadn't just made it up."
_______________________________________________________________________
Alice Bentley
While I don't know the complete history, I've noticed that the yellow
color not only covers the differing paper types (mentioned in earlier
posts) but significantly covers the aging of the book as it sits on the
shelf.
Perhaps this isn't as much an issue it the "it's three months old, strip
it" shops, but we have some titles that are older than the store (8
years). Aging shows on some non-painted edges in as little as six months.
--
Alice Bentley -|- The Stars Our Destination Bookstore
Steve Glover
>And this situation could soon get very interesting, given that increasing
>numbers of books will be in the public domain in the US while still in
>copyright in Britain (because of the new EU 70-year rule). Can't wait
>for next year's dodgily-imported cheapo editions of H.G. Wells...
Ummm... I'm fairly sure you'll find that nothing went *back* into
copyright once it had been out. Certain publishers and estates would
like folk to think so, though...
Steve
steve....@ukonline.co.uk, using Free Agent
No longer kur...@tardis.ed.ac.uk or steve_...@hicom.lut.ac.uk
and soon not even ss...@festival.ed.ac.uk...
P Nielsen Hayden
>Ummm... I'm fairly sure you'll find that nothing went *back* into
>copyright once it had been out. Certain publishers and estates would
>like folk to think so, though...
Well, I'm no expert in UK copyright law, but that's not what Patrick Parrinder
says in "The Great Copyright Plot" in the February 1996 INTERZONE. "The new
European legislation is retrospective, so that many famous early 20th-century
authors are having their copyrights revived. For the great-grandchildren of
some of these authors, it must feel like winning the National Lottery."
I imagine Parrinder could be entirely mistaken. Is he?
David G. Bell
> In article <4fe1vd$11...@morse.ukonline.co.uk>, steve....@ukonline.co.uk
> (Steve Glover) wrote:
>
> >Ummm... I'm fairly sure you'll find that nothing went *back* into
> >copyright once it had been out. Certain publishers and estates would
> >like folk to think so, though...
>
> Well, I'm no expert in UK copyright law, but that's not what Patrick Parrinde
> says in "The Great Copyright Plot" in the February 1996 INTERZONE. "The new
> European legislation is retrospective, so that many famous early 20th-century
> authors are having their copyrights revived. For the great-grandchildren of
> some of these authors, it must feel like winning the National Lottery."
>
> I imagine Parrinder could be entirely mistaken. Is he?
I believe that there is something, in one of the treaties that led to
the EU, about laws not being retroactive, but that is something a bit
different I think -- you can't be sued under the new copyright law over
something you did before it came into effect. But I wouldn't like to
guess what specific provision was made for something which had fallen
out of copyright. (Note to American readers: the American term 'public
domain' doesn't seem to be used in the UK -- anything the government
produces is 'Crown Copyright'.)
Has anyone actually bothered to read the new law?
I suppose there will be something about it in the next edition of The
Writer's and Artist's Yearbook -- I checked when this first came up, and
all they said was that they didn't know.
P Nielsen Hayden
>(Note to American readers: the American term 'public
>domain' doesn't seem to be used in the UK -- anything the government
>produces is 'Crown Copyright'.)
Both halves of this sentence may well be true, but I'm not sure what they
have to do with each other. The phrase "public domain" doesn't have anything
particularly to do with materials published by the government.
Chris Croughton
>Well, I'm no expert in UK copyright law, but that's not what Patrick Parrinder
>says in "The Great Copyright Plot" in the February 1996 INTERZONE. "The new
>European legislation is retrospective, so that many famous early 20th-century
>authors are having their copyrights revived. For the great-grandchildren of
>some of these authors, it must feel like winning the National Lottery."
>
>I imagine Parrinder could be entirely mistaken. Is he?
I know people involved in copyright, and the whole area is still
confused. Half say things are going back into copyright, the other half
say it's jus that nothing will come out of copyright for another 20
years, and yet another half say it depends on individual cases.
In other words, a typical political balls-up (and if the US government
doesn't like me using the term they can come over here and try to
extradite me)...
***********************************************************************
* ch...@keris.demon.co.uk * *
* chr...@cix.compulink.co.uk * FIAWOL (Filking Is A Way Of Life) *
* 10001...@compuserve.com * *
***********************************************************************
Alison Scott
> (Note to American readers: the American term 'public
>domain' doesn't seem to be used in the UK -- anything the government
>produces is 'Crown Copyright'.)
Only two things wrong with this.
(1) The term 'public domain' is used in the UK.
(2) Not everything published by the government is Crown Copyright. I
had a lengthy and fascinating conversation with some staff at HMSO
once which convinced me that the copyright position of legislation is
more complicated than anyone could possibly imagine.
--
Alison Scott ali...@fuggles.demon.co.uk
David G. Bell
ch...@keris.demon.co.uk "Chris Croughton" writes:
> In article <4finht$i...@park.interport.net> p...@tor.com "P Nielsen Hayden"
> writes:
>
> >Well, I'm no expert in UK copyright law, but that's not what Patrick Parrind
> >says in "The Great Copyright Plot" in the February 1996 INTERZONE. "The new
> >European legislation is retrospective, so that many famous early 20th-centur
> >authors are having their copyrights revived. For the great-grandchildren of
> >some of these authors, it must feel like winning the National Lottery."
> >
> >I imagine Parrinder could be entirely mistaken. Is he?
>
> I know people involved in copyright, and the whole area is still
> confused. Half say things are going back into copyright, the other half
> say it's jus that nothing will come out of copyright for another 20
> years, and yet another half say it depends on individual cases.
>
> In other words, a typical political balls-up (and if the US government
> doesn't like me using the term they can come over here and try to
> extradite me)...
I would hope that all these bright young things in the publishing world
who are confused have thought to consult a lawyer.
I'm prepared to take pnh's word on US law, because he works in the
business, he can't afford to make mistakes, and the law hasn't been
changed recently in the USA. On the other hand, not having read the
article, I just don't know if Parrinder can be trusted, because I don't
know the basis on which he makes the assertion. Has he read the
legislation, and has he consulted with lawyers who have knowledge of UK
and European law?
And, if there is an ambiguity in the law, people in the business have
reasons to interpret it in different ways. Some publishers want to not
have to pay royalties, others want to be the only people publishing a
work. Both believe that their approach will turn a profit and, sooner
or later, some Judge will have to decide which version is right, so that
some other Judge can rule on an appeal, and so on.
Bill Roper
result in works that had fallen into public domain returning to copyrighted
status. Specifically, Kipling's work (which has frequently been set to
music in the filk and non-filk musical community) will be under copyright
again.
A filk publisher who is working on a Kipling tape is hurrying to get it
out before March 1 (which I gather is the effective date that the copyrights
will go back into effect). So they've either gotten bad advice, or...
--
Bill Roper, ro...@mcs.com
John Edmund Rupik
<p...@tor.com> writes
>In article <4fe1vd$11...@morse.ukonline.co.uk>, steve....@ukonline.co.uk
>(Steve Glover) wrote:
>
>>Ummm... I'm fairly sure you'll find that nothing went *back* into
>>copyright once it had been out. Certain publishers and estates would
>>like folk to think so, though...
>
>
>I imagine Parrinder could be entirely mistaken. Is he?
>
>-----
I don't think he is wrong. I have to deal with contractual copyright
issues as part of my job and my undestanding is that copyright
restrictions have been reimposed on those works, which come within the
new period of copyright.
If I am mistaken please let me know.
--
John Edmund Rupik
JER...@mortis.demon.co.uk
Chaos rules, and will always rule, despite appearances.
Tony Johnston
<JER...@mortis.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >Well, I'm no expert in UK copyright law, but that's not what Patrick
Parrinder
> >says in "The Great Copyright Plot" in the February 1996 INTERZONE.
Blimey! I thought IZ was dead! Sorry if I'm a total dunce for not
knowing, but is it subs or something? I haven't seen it a newsagents for
years! Are they on the net? What's the address? etc...
cheers!
Tony Johnston
o-------------------------oo-------------------------o
For the benefit of those who may be scanning...
[Fuck] [Terrorist] [Bomb] [Explosive] [Assassination]
[FBI] [NSA] [IRA] [Cunt] [AOL] [Compuserve] [Firebomb]
o-------------------------oo-------------------------o