TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Independent author John Locke joins Amazon's million-Kindle-seller club

27 点作者 teralaser将近 14 年前

11 条评论

dhyasama将近 14 年前
Shockingly naive article. "If he sold one million books at $100 each he would make so much more! What is he thinking?" Uh, maybe no one would buy his books if he charged more? Perhaps he's an intelligent man and has experimented with different prices? Perhaps the author of the article should have asked him?
scott_s将近 14 年前
This piece is bizarre because the author never once acknowledges that it's possible Locke could <i>not</i> sell a million of his books the conventional way. In other words, the author never acknowledges that Locke may have made <i>less money</i> with a traditional publisher.
StavrosK将近 14 年前
&#62; Locke makes less money with his 99-cent gambit than he would selling the same number of books with a traditional publisher.<p>It's like nobody has ever heard of a supply/demand curve.
评论 #2679100 未加载
评论 #2679391 未加载
评论 #2678895 未加载
billybob将近 14 年前
This title made me do two double-takes.<p>My first thought: "Are people are buying public domain philosophy works as Kindle books?" <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Locke" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Locke</a><p>My second thought: "Is somebody writing as Locke as a reference to Ender's Game?"
kmfrk将近 14 年前
&#62;If he sold a million Kindle e-books at 99 cents, he'd clear $346,500 -- nice work if you can get it. But if he were working with a traditional publisher, that $346,500 might be a lot closer to $1 million.<p>If there's an "if" in every one of your hypothetical sentences, it's probably not an argument worth pursuing.
brendino将近 14 年前
This article fails to bring several factors into its economic model. It should be about incentives and demand elasticity here - the "steepness" of the demand curve.<p>According to the article, he recieves $0.35 from a Kindle sale, and ~$2 from a traditional book sale. In this case, he would need to sell (2/0.35) = 5.7 times as many Kindle books as traditional books to be neutral between the options. To get the equivalent incentive from traditional books, he would need to sell ~175,000 traditional books.<p>Since he offers both physical and Kindle editions for his books, the question becomes, did ~175,000 customers purchase the Kindle book who normally would have purchased the physical book? Probably not, IMO.<p>So basically, it sounds like Locke actually knows what he's doing - he's driven by monetary incentives and his arrangement has more-or-less maximized his proceeds.
bcl将近 14 年前
It will be interesting to see how sustainable his success is. I bought one of his books for $0.99, well below my impulse buy threshold, and found it to be worth about that. It wasn't a really bad book, but it wasn't much better than what you find in a college creative writing class.
评论 #2679252 未加载
hongkonger将近 14 年前
Was the author employed by a traditional publisher to discredit the Kindle business model?
评论 #2679201 未加载
ShabbyDoo将近 14 年前
So, is it known for sure that Amazon did not cut him a special deal? It might be rational to incent a "hot" author to offer up a good deal on an exclusive in the Kindle marketplace. Perhaps he got to keep a much higher percentage?
UncleOxidant将近 14 年前
Oh, I was thinking it might be the 17th Century English philosopher.
wglb将近 14 年前
The gatekeepers are angry, and they are experiencing major cognitive dissonance.