I took a short, informal poll on twitter this morning regarding the cost of e-books, and the responses I got were interesting. You see, I was looking to buy a book (666 Park Avenue by Gabriella Pierce) when I realized that the Kindle e-book was a dollar and a half more expensive than the paperback. While part of the reason to have gotten a Kindle was to slow the build-up of books around my already helplessly overcrowded little house, I have a problem paying more for an e-book than for a paperback. There's nothing physical to drive up the cost, so a physical book should always be more expensive, in my opinion, than an e-book which is formated and transmitted electronically. I understand that a great deal of work went into producing the book, and I wouldn't have had a problem if they were the same price, or if the e-book was only slightly cheaper. I just don't want to pay more for pixels than for paperbacks.
So what did my twitter pals say?
Well, the responses were mixed.
While some said they would never pay more for an e-book than for paperbacks, others said they didn't count cost in the benefits/drawbacks of the e-reader. I even got one response that said it's situational and depended upon how much she needed the book. The more urgently she needed the book, the more likely she would be to pay more for an e-book. One pal, who I've known for quite some time, had no opinion but to agree that the book I was looking at sounded amazing and that he would have to read it!
So what about you? Would you pay more for an e-book than for a paperback? Does cost factor into your decision to buy an e-book? Do you think e-books are the devil's spawn sent as the harbinger of the destruction of all of book-kind? Drop me a comment and let me know what you think, I'm really interested, especially since my little twitter poll yielded such mixed results.
Image via TNW