Amazon Raises Royalties On Kindle Books to 70%, With Condidtions

[Yeratel]

In a bid to keep the Kindle at the top of the increasingly popular ebook reader category, Amazon has announced that they are raising the royalty on Kindle books sold though the Kindle store to 70%. On a typical $9.99 book, the royalty paid to the publisher of author would jump from $3.15 under the "standard" royalty arrangement to $6.25 under the 70% option: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2010/01/some-authors-still-split-on-amazons-70-royalty-offer.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss

As noted in the article, there are a few catches:

The catch, however, is that authors or publishers must list their books for between $2.99 and $9.99 on the Kindle. A majority of Kindle books already fall into this range, but authors are able to set prices higher if they want, and some do.

The price must also be at least 20 percent below the lowest list price for the physical book, the book must be available in all geographical areas where the authors has rights, it must include all features of the Kindle store (including text-to-speech capabilities), and the Kindle price must be the same or below the price offered at other e-book stores.

Essentially, the pricing and features of your book must be most attractive on the Kindle compared to any other option on the market. In return, more cash gets paid out.

[LizW65]

Wow, royalties have really gone up.  The last time I looked into it, they were typically paying 8 cents on the dollar.

[nerd1]

Does anyone know what the royalty percentage is for actual books? Paperback and hardcover? Just roughly.

As a technophile, I like the idea of ebooks and the possibilities for distribution, environmental impact etc.


However, the decimation that the publishing industry will undergo during this change is another factor. If the royalty percentage to authors goes up because of the electronic medium, this is an important factor in my internal debate. And yes, I realize that I am basically saying that I am having an argument with myself...and am thus insane.

[svb1972]

I admit, that if Jim had a "donation" button on his website, and had PDF's or heck even rtf's of his books available on the website for downloading.  I'd happily donate the full price of a book directly to him.

[Kris_W]

It really is not a matter of royalties going up, not when compared to the costs of production. When that is factored in even 70% is lower than royalties in the 1950's.

The 70% sounds good until you look at the deal as a whole. Publishers aren't paying to print the books, aren't editing, aren't doing publicity, they aren't even selective enough to encourage readers to look specifically for their imprint - In fact I'm hard pressed to see what it is they are doing to earn their 30%.