Dead Trees is a Dead Model - Guest Post by Barry Eisler

This guest post is a perfect follow up to my post yesterday about bemoaning the fate of books versus getting exciting about the opportunities the future presents. As always, it gives me great pleasure to welcome back one of my  all time favorite guest bloggers. (Who has a new book out, Fault Line, in a week that you have to buy  - and that you can read an excerpt of here.) - MJR

Dead Trees is a Dead Model by Barry Eisler

Tonight I sat down to write a piece on how authors, literary agents, publishers, and booksellers need to change their business strategies  to adapt to the advent of ebooks.  I wasn't going to spend much time arguing that ebooks will displace paper ones because the displacement  seems not just inevitable to me, but immediate, as well.  But then I came across a review of Amazon's latest Kindle in the New York Times.  The article's author, NYT technology columnist David Pogue, loves the new  version, but nonetheless concludes that paper books are going to be  fine:

“The point everyone is missing is that in Technoland, nothing ever replaces anything.  E-book readers won't replace books.   The iPhone won't replace e-book readers.  Everything just splinters.   They will all thrive, serving their respective audiences”

I don't think so.  So before I go into how everyone in the industry should adapt to the changes wrought by ebooks, I guess I need to describe the nature of those changes.

Let's start with Mr. Pogue's argument that "nothing ever replaces  anything."  Maybe it's just semantics, but when the VHS rental market  "splintered" to include DVDs, Blockbuster got hammered.  Are people  still using VHS?  Some, no doubt.  Is anyone making real money in that  market?  Not anymore.  And when broadband gets fast enough and storage  cheap enough, will people still want to bother with DVDs purchased at  Wal-Mart?  Maybe a few, but it won't be a mass market anymore.  One  might also argue that music downloads have "splintered" the music market, but the description would do nothing to restore lost profits  among labels and retailers alike.  In fact, I read Mr. Pogue's article on the NYT website, having canceled my subscription to the paper  edition years ago.  It's true in one sense that the Times delivery  system has splintered into paper and digital, but that hardly means  either is thriving.  In fact, the Internet has hollowed out the Times'  subscription, advertising, and classified ad revenue streams.  That  the Times still sells dead trees in the midst of such a hollowing is  irrelevant.

Rail companies once made the mistake of thinking they were in the  railroad business.  They weren't:  they were in the transportation business, and the advent of the interstate highway system, which amounted to free "tracks" for long distance trucking, crushed rail transport (just as the airplane and the car devastated rail company passenger profits).  Publishers who believe that a paper book and a story are the same thing, and that what consumers want isn't stories, but rather the paper books that are currently used to deliver them,  will be making the same mistake the rail companies made, with the same results.

Still not convinced?  It's true the advent of gunpowder hasn't eliminated the bow and arrow -- after all, my daughter took archery at summer camp.  But does the continued existence of the bow and arrow matter?  And yes, the advent of the automobile merely "splintered" the transportation industry, because, after all, you can still catch a horse and buggy ride around Central Park.  I could go on, but suffice it to say that arguments about what it means for an industry to "splinter," or the relevance of a certain means of delivery not being extirpated by another, are essentially academic.  What matters is how severely an industry's profits will be diminished if it fails to adapt.  And while I agree that paper books will survive in the era of electronic books, they'll do so only as a niche growing in the compost the current publishing industry will leave behind.  This is hardly "thriving."

Only someone nourished from birth on traditional books could confuse an inculcated preference for paper with an actual dead tree advantage.  I can't remember where I came across this thought experiment, but for me it settles the argument:  if you'd never heard of paper books, and had grown up instead only with a Kindle or Sony Reader or equivalent, and someone today pitched you on the marvelous new technology of paper books, you'd think the person pitching you was daft.  But they're so heavy! you'd say.  I don't want to lug five of those things in a suitcase on vacation; I'd rather travel with my whole weightless library.  Wait, I have to go to the store to buy these things, or order and wait for the mail, rather than downloading anywhere in an instant?  And what, no hyperlinks?  No built-in dictionary?  I can't adjust the font size so I don't need my reading glasses?  Sorry, not interested.

Remember, it wasn't so long ago that people were arguing Amazon would never succeed; after all, customers needed to physically browse and touch and heft books en route to buying them.  The successor to that argument is that ebooks will remain a niche because people enjoy the sensory experience of touching and holding and smelling actual paper.  That's not analysis; it's whistling past the graveyard.

The only thing keeping paper books going as a mass market today is inertia.  But as older generations die out and younger ones come online, and as generations in the middle try ebooks and realize their advantages, the demise of paper books will continue to accelerate.  That's an important point:  the marginalization of paper books won't  continue at its current rate.  It'll pick up speed until it hits a tipping point, and then -- poof! -- the only paper books published will be coffee table books and other niche forms that serve a unique (and relatively small) market.

How soon?  Look at the reviews Amazon's latest Kindle is getting.  Listen to people who use one.  Read M.J. Rose's smart observations on this blog.  And look at the way publishers are trying to maintain their traditional market:  they're using increasingly cheap paper, essentially trying to compete on price against a medium  with zero costs of paper, ink, warehousing, and distribution.  The fact that paper publishers are even trying to wage this battle on the  electronic medium's terms is evidence of how soon and how badly  they're going to lose it.

So:  if you're an author, a literary agent, a publisher, or a bookseller, what do you do?  All that and more in Part 2, available soon exclusively here on the Internets.

Comments

[Laurie]

Okay, okay - I'd talked myself out of wanting a Kindle - I like the feel of paper - but now I'm back in.

[Lyle T. Lachmuth - The Unsticking Coach]

Barry ... I agree in part.

I believe e-books will fill a huge market.

But, and maybe this is my Inner Luddite, I still love the feel of a book in my hands -- especially when it's a John Rain story! (how's that for sucking up?)

Lyle

[Paul Elwork]

You make a number of very strong points, Barry, as usual. I think the dominance of ebooks is inevitable, too, and you very eloquently illustrate many reasons that we should think so. I'm hoping, still, that the specialty market of print books will remain somewhat more viable than you suggest, however, and we won't know for sure until the time to come. In the meantime, I agree that there's no sense in being gloomy about it, or whistling past the graveyard in denial, but I'm never going to have the heart to dance on the grave of print books, either. I'm Luddite enough to say that.

[David J. Montgomery]

I love reading and I love technology -- yet I've never had any desire to get an e-book device.

However, I think you're probably right that once we're all dead, the kids will look at books like buggy whips.

[Jamie Fellrath]

There's another point that hasn't been made yet - whether you "believe" in the science or not, global warming and the steps being taken to combat it are changing the way we do a lot of things, and the amount of paper we use is going to come under the gun soon, I think. That means books. The auto industry is having problems because of oil scarcity and global warming, the coal industry is under stress, and other industries that use up our resources are going to be stressed, too. That means books.

[Hank Shiffman]

In some respects, Barry is recapitulating Clayton Christensen's argument in The Innovator's Dilemma. Dilemma shows how companies fail by listening to their current customers when new and disruptive technologies arrive on the scene. The new technologies don't appeal to the existing base, but to new bases that aren't yet identifiable or at least quantifiable. His examples include smaller, cheaper disk drives; from my own experience I'd add 3D graphics in PCs vs. engineering workstations. Ebooks and downloaded music look awfully similar in the way new suppliers like Apple and Amazon are displacing existing brick & mortar.

[Kim Derting]

I love the idea of the Kindle or the Sony Reader (especially, like you mentioned, for portability...and to lose those lovely reading glasses). But on the flip side I also love a beautifully furnished library as well. I suppose the middle ground is to go ahead and purchase the books I love and to download the just *eh* books, so they don't take up precious space on my shelves.

[Jenn Nixon]

I'll always be a paper book reader...but I'm also into trends, so eventually it'll have to be both for me, I'm sure.

Great post, Barry!!

[B Novotney]

Isn't the fact that we ARE reading wonderful(?) no matter being e-book, paper back, hardback? A book is a book is a book. An e-book is an e-book is an e-book.
Enjoy the word...read something:-)

[Rob Preece, Publisher]

I especially enjoyed your points about how a Kindle/Sony reader would react to the proposed introduction of paper. eBooks aren't just cheaper, they're better. With advanced reader technology, I hope I won't have to listen to the old "but I don't like reading on my computer" line (as if we don't spend our lives reading on the computer).

Rob Preece
Publisher, www.BooksForABuck.com

[Jeff]

A lot of books will definitely go the way of e-books, especially genre fiction. But fans of literary fiction, for instance, will probably still prefer to spend the bucks on paper (even though the books may be produced POD rather than off-set but that's another topic). And what about cookbooks? Recipes have been online for years now but yet people still buy cookbooks. Sure the market for print books will change drastically but it will not disappear entirely.

[Michelle Moran]

I think Barry is right.

Certainly, paper will still be around. Most schools, for example, still use VHS, and until schools find a way of bolting Kindles (or some similar device) to a desk so they can't be stolen, it will have to be paper.

But the future is probably going to be a handheld device and instant gratification. Why wait days for a novel to arrive from Amazon when you can download it in minutes? It's about the new generations coming up, not necessarily us, and I suspect Barry is correct. Why would the new generations of readers want paper? Paper books will be like VHS: used in schools (until something every student can afford is invented), but few other places.

[Dumbo Books of Brooklyn]

As a bankrupt small press, we have to add that Ernest Hemingway's granddaughter is a dead model, too.

[Jake White]

Yay, Barry! I agree totally (if not more)

The touchy-feely paper book apologetic which we hear over and over is very tired...

Plus, how clunky and crazy expensive to chop down huge heavy trees, load them onto big diesel burning trucks, unload them, chop up and grind to a pulp, add bleaching chemicals, process until flat, dry, put on rolls, re-load onto big diesel burning trucks and haul cross-country to paper storage warehouses. Then re-load again onto big diesel burning trucks, haul to printing plants, add ink, cut and bind (sew or glue). Now ship to book distribution warehouses (via diesel -burning .. you guesed it ..) It seems well, kind of primitive, no?

[Barry Eisler]

Thanks for the comments, everyone. FWIW, I love paper books, too, but my sentiment will have little bearing on the medium's future. I loved my LP record albums, too -- didn't the art work just look better in that bigger format? And they were so hefty and tangible, too! -- but albums are long gone now.

To reiterate: of course paper wont' completely disappear, but again, whether a medium will entirely disappear isn't the point. If you're a bookstore owner today, does knowing that paper cookbooks and coffee table books will be around tomorrow cause you to breath a big sigh of relief?

Anyway, I'll have more thoughts soon about how the various players in the publishing ecosystem should adapt. After that, Fault Line kicks off on March 10 and after that I'll be on the tour for the rest of the month. The schedule's on my website; hope to see you on the road!

Cheers,
Barry

[Beth]

After staring at a computer screen all day long at work, who wants to go home and stare at another screen in order to read a novel for pleasure? Not I! Plus, I would definitely ruin at least two dozen electronic devices in the hot tub.

Looking forward to the new book, Barry.

Beth

[Lee Child]

Barry, I love the new book - having read an advance (paper) copy - and I'm sure it will do well in hardcover, and exponentially better in paperback. And it's those paperback buyers you need to think about. Statistically most of them will be infrequent readers who will buy your book almost as a distress purchase ... at the airport, leaving for vacation, aware of a vague cultural imperative or habit, thinking, "Oh well, I better buy a book, I suppose." They'll enjoy it, and next year they'll buy another one (or better still, one of mine.) Or between us we might up their consumption to two books a year. That's where the bulk of our audience is. Infrequent, almost reluctant purchasers ... but as a universe there are so many of them in terms of raw numbers that they form our base. What are the chances that such people would self-identify up front as readers, and pre-equip themselves with hardware? Almost none at all, I think. Don't confuse the LP to CD to iPod transitions. Hardware was always necessary for music consumption. With e-readers, we're asking fundamentally uninterested consumers to pre-navigate a brand-new speedbump that wasn't there before. I'm very dubious. Integrated devices might do the trick - phone, computer, DVD player, e-reader - but most people won't respond to something that's not small, and I think e-readers can't be too small. So I think we are heading for a genuinely split market - e-readers for habitual readers, and mass market paperbacks for occasional readers.

[James Swezey]

The Kindle and other electronic reading devices will revolutionize how individuals read and keep track of various forms of media. As a writer and author of a recent ebook, I am thrilled and excited for what the future will hold for the authors of the world that embrace this new technology. And for how the Kindle works, how awesome it would it be to get the Wall Street Journal everyday with having to accumulate piles of old newspapers. It is a new way for people to become environmentally mindful of earth's resources, and for writers to have more control of their creative works.

[M.J. Rose]

What Lee writes about is the single biggest issue (in my opinion) in marketing and selling book. And impulse buyers versus self-identified readers are the reason I think that paper books - especially paperbacks aren't going to disappear for a while... that doesn't take away the possibilites that electronic books offer and I've got a part 2 to my post coming up with some ideas of what we can do with ebooks we've never been able to do before with print books.

[kent lawrence]

they are lot of model today so if you wish to become a model please check this out You have the looks! Try joining this model search. They are needing a product endorser! check out this video. youtube.com/watch?v=KdH22MFN1zo&feature=channel_page or go to http://www.antonovstars.com/

[Barry Eisler]

This is why I love BBH -- it's not just MJ's great posts, it's the thought-provoking comments, too.

Lee, thanks for the kind words about Fault Line and for the insightful points about airport book buying habits etc. I'd argue in response that we're still talking about when and not whether paper books become the niche and ebooks become the mass market, and that buyers like the ones you describe are part of the inertia I referenced in my post. Why this is all a question of when rather than whether is the subject of part 2 of this piece, so I'll say more there and will look forward to more of your and everyone else's terrific thoughts in response.

Cheers,
Barry

[David J. Montgomery]

I think Lee makes a provocative point, and I think part of the fallout of this transition, were it to happen, is that a significant percentage of the authors who today are able to make a halfway decent living writing books wound find themselves making no living at all.

[Chelo J.]

Personally I rather have a real book that I can place on a bookshelf because it look so nice. Second if I have too many book, I can always sell them, trade them or give them away, I bet you can't do that with an e-reader. Once I buy a book I get the feeling it's mine plus I don't have to worry about a virus or someone placing a software program in my real book. Plus it's is easier and faster to scan a real book by flipping thru the pages. And I can always buy the book of my choice from a bookstore, with a e-reader a person is stuck with whatever books that company sells. Plus an e-reader cost about $300 to $400 a pop. Supposed a friend want to borrow my book, I sure am not going to give him or her my e-reader.

[Susan Fourtane]

Great post, Barry. An updated topic that also connects to Global Warming.
E-books are environmentally friendly. =)

-Susan

[Conal Tuohy]

It's true there's a dichotomy between e-book people and p-book people. And it's true that casual, occasional, readers will tend to fall into the p-book camp (unless they are geeks, in which case they might buy a Kindle for its Wifi capability). But it's important to realise that this dichotomy is not fixed. There are people who are intermediate between the two camps. What's important is what happens here, at the border.

The trend is clearly towards e-books, and (finally getting to the crux) every person who adopts e-book technology causes the trend to accelerate. Every new e-book person makes e-book technology marginally more profitable, and dead tree publishing marginally less profitable (economies of scale are vital). When e-books are mass market commodities, increased investment by manufacturers will drive the cost of e-book reader devices down, making them more price-competitive with paper books. At present, cheap devices are cheaper than the most expensive paper books, but eventually even cheap paper books will have to compete against cheap mass-market electronics. And as paper publishing becomes less profitable, p-books prices will actually tend to rise, and more people will abandon the sinking ship. You may like the smell of paper, but would you pay twice what you pay now for it? Three times? Where is your personal tipping point?