Eddyz Aquila:
Consider the bankruptcy and problems of independent booksellers and even large ones, this means less publicity and availability of books so that means lower sales.
Like Jamesaritchie said, book sales are actually holding pretty stable at the moment and the problems being faced by independent book stores and the chainstores are actually not driven by a lack of public demand for books, but by a combination of:
- competition from supermarkets, who are able to sell more copies of the biggest name authors for lower prices;
- competition from Amazon, which does not have the same lease costs that the independents/chainstores have nor the high personnel costs and which had first mover advantage in the on-line market, which has given it the ability to negotiate (or in some cases, seek to impose) deep discounts on publishers which aren't otherwise available;
- higher costs in physically stocking books;
- higher lease costs;
- personnel costs.
The problem isn't that people don't want to buy books. The problem is that people want a bargain on books so if there are 2 outlets selling the same book and one is 60% cheaper than the other one, then they're going to go for the cheapest.
There's a really good book that looks at the fiction publishing industry and how it operates in the UK and US - Merchants of Culture by John B. Thompson. I'd strongly suggest that you read it.
Eddyz Aquila:
I'm talking hypothetically here where the author has a publishable manuscript and one that can sell. I was referring to his chances of seeing his book on the shelves with those details in mind.
People keep talking about technology and ebooks replacing print books. Personally, I don't see that happening. There are some people who like printed books (I know that I prefer them to ereaders at the moment).
The issue is whether the retail side of the industry can come up with a physical presence model that works more economically for them, e.g. by using POD technology in store to print books there and then. Amazon is, ironically, taking a look at running some physical shops with directly available stock.
Contact lenses and laser eye surgery haven't replaced spectacles. The techologies exist side by side.
Eddyz Aquila:
The lower the advance the lower the interest in promoting the author to get the advance back. An advance is both a risk and a secure investment. The publisher wants his money back, the author wants to get his money back as well through promotion and more books.
When this disappears, there's an even lower incentive to produce very high quality books when you can produce a decent/good book fast just to sell it.
I disagree.
Author A might have a lower advance from Simon & Schuster than Author B but both will have the same quality product. The difference is that while Author B might have his/her books on the 3 for 2 table and in Tescos and Sainsburys, Author B also faces more pressure to get the sales to justify the publisher's investment. If Author A's sales exceed the expectations of the lower advance, then S&S is more likely to increase their marketing budget for them the next time around.
Finally there's the fact that the big commercial shareholders all have institutional investors and shareholders who want them to make money. Publishers that start putting out shitty books with low production values get punished in market share and in turn in sinking share prices.
MM