<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_05_006239</id>
	<title>Murdoch Says E-Book Prices Will Kill Paper Books</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1265385120000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>hrimhari writes <i>"The settlement between Amazon and Macmillian got the attention of a known dinosaur. Consistent to his views, Mr. Murdoch <a href="http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/02/behold-the-amazon-effect-now-murdochs-gunning-for-the-10-e-book/?utm\_source=feedburner&amp;utm\_medium=feed&amp;utm\_campaign=Feed\%3A+wired\%2Findex+(Wired\%3A+Index+3+(Top+Stories+2))&amp;utm\_content=Google+International">wants to defend his book editors by killing the cheaper solution</a>. '"We don't like the Amazon model of selling everything at $9.99," Murdoch said. "They pay us the wholesale price of $14 or whatever we charge," he said. "But I think it really devalues books, and it hurts all the retailers of the hardcover books.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>hrimhari writes " The settlement between Amazon and Macmillian got the attention of a known dinosaur .
Consistent to his views , Mr. Murdoch wants to defend his book editors by killing the cheaper solution .
' " We do n't like the Amazon model of selling everything at $ 9.99 , " Murdoch said .
" They pay us the wholesale price of $ 14 or whatever we charge , " he said .
" But I think it really devalues books , and it hurts all the retailers of the hardcover books .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hrimhari writes "The settlement between Amazon and Macmillian got the attention of a known dinosaur.
Consistent to his views, Mr. Murdoch wants to defend his book editors by killing the cheaper solution.
'"We don't like the Amazon model of selling everything at $9.99," Murdoch said.
"They pay us the wholesale price of $14 or whatever we charge," he said.
"But I think it really devalues books, and it hurts all the retailers of the hardcover books.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031184</id>
	<title>Articles like this...</title>
	<author>koan</author>
	<datestamp>1265305680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Make me want to detonate a global EMP.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Make me want to detonate a global EMP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Make me want to detonate a global EMP.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31036366</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math.</title>
	<author>OFnow</author>
	<datestamp>1265394300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Number of times you can loan: 1  (it never comes back).<br>Resale value: 0 (someone else has it)</p><p>There, fixed that for you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Number of times you can loan : 1 ( it never comes back ) .Resale value : 0 ( someone else has it ) There , fixed that for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Number of times you can loan: 1  (it never comes back).Resale value: 0 (someone else has it)There, fixed that for you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034520</id>
	<title>books aren't going anywhere</title>
	<author>agentultra</author>
	<datestamp>1265385600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The medium might be changing, but the concept of a book isn't going anywhere.</p><p>However, paper books will be around for another couple generations at least. And then they might go the way of vinyl.</p><p>The wonderful thing about paper books is that they're easy to read and don't require batteries.</p><p>Trade off? They take up physical space. Kill trees (a renewable resource anyway).</p><p>Personally I use a mix of both. I prefer technical manuals in e-book but damned if I'll read my fiction on a glowing box. Print doesn't strain my eyes as hard and won't run out of power during long reading sessions.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The medium might be changing , but the concept of a book is n't going anywhere.However , paper books will be around for another couple generations at least .
And then they might go the way of vinyl.The wonderful thing about paper books is that they 're easy to read and do n't require batteries.Trade off ?
They take up physical space .
Kill trees ( a renewable resource anyway ) .Personally I use a mix of both .
I prefer technical manuals in e-book but damned if I 'll read my fiction on a glowing box .
Print does n't strain my eyes as hard and wo n't run out of power during long reading sessions .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The medium might be changing, but the concept of a book isn't going anywhere.However, paper books will be around for another couple generations at least.
And then they might go the way of vinyl.The wonderful thing about paper books is that they're easy to read and don't require batteries.Trade off?
They take up physical space.
Kill trees (a renewable resource anyway).Personally I use a mix of both.
I prefer technical manuals in e-book but damned if I'll read my fiction on a glowing box.
Print doesn't strain my eyes as hard and won't run out of power during long reading sessions.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31036408</id>
	<title>Business Idea</title>
	<author>PoolOfThought</author>
	<datestamp>1265394480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone want to do some consulting for Murdoch?<p>Here's the business:</p><p>

Amazon Buys books at $14 from the publisher. Then sells them for $10. Murdoch doesn't like this arrangement, so Murdoch will be responsible for the venture capital and will help to fund a business called LossLeaderWhacker (first name go round... sorry, I know it stinks as a name). LossLeaderWhacker's purpose is to buy up lossleaders on behalf of the wholesaler who sold them in the first place. In this case, LLW would buy up ebooks from Amazon.

Then, LossLeaderWhacker could turn around and sell the books for $9. So Murdoch makes atleast $4 a book, but as much as $13.  I say "as much as" b/c Amazon could always contract out LLW to strike back and buy those $9 books and sell them for $8. And so on until $0 (or until they pay us to take them!).  </p><p>

By only buying the loss leading products (that Murdoch doesn't want sold at a loss anyway) he can make his  point WITHOUT having to quit selling the product to Amazon. Done at enough volume it could certainly make a point. And while this would not work nearly as well with tangible goods for various reasons (shipping, warehouseing, etc), it could certainly work some something that is simply transmitted down a wire.</p><p>

Amazon can choose to (1) quit carrying the product or (2) raise the price to something they won't lose money on every time (3) keep doing the same thing and bleed to death $4 at a time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone want to do some consulting for Murdoch ? Here 's the business : Amazon Buys books at $ 14 from the publisher .
Then sells them for $ 10 .
Murdoch does n't like this arrangement , so Murdoch will be responsible for the venture capital and will help to fund a business called LossLeaderWhacker ( first name go round... sorry , I know it stinks as a name ) .
LossLeaderWhacker 's purpose is to buy up lossleaders on behalf of the wholesaler who sold them in the first place .
In this case , LLW would buy up ebooks from Amazon .
Then , LossLeaderWhacker could turn around and sell the books for $ 9 .
So Murdoch makes atleast $ 4 a book , but as much as $ 13 .
I say " as much as " b/c Amazon could always contract out LLW to strike back and buy those $ 9 books and sell them for $ 8 .
And so on until $ 0 ( or until they pay us to take them ! ) .
By only buying the loss leading products ( that Murdoch does n't want sold at a loss anyway ) he can make his point WITHOUT having to quit selling the product to Amazon .
Done at enough volume it could certainly make a point .
And while this would not work nearly as well with tangible goods for various reasons ( shipping , warehouseing , etc ) , it could certainly work some something that is simply transmitted down a wire .
Amazon can choose to ( 1 ) quit carrying the product or ( 2 ) raise the price to something they wo n't lose money on every time ( 3 ) keep doing the same thing and bleed to death $ 4 at a time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone want to do some consulting for Murdoch?Here's the business:

Amazon Buys books at $14 from the publisher.
Then sells them for $10.
Murdoch doesn't like this arrangement, so Murdoch will be responsible for the venture capital and will help to fund a business called LossLeaderWhacker (first name go round... sorry, I know it stinks as a name).
LossLeaderWhacker's purpose is to buy up lossleaders on behalf of the wholesaler who sold them in the first place.
In this case, LLW would buy up ebooks from Amazon.
Then, LossLeaderWhacker could turn around and sell the books for $9.
So Murdoch makes atleast $4 a book, but as much as $13.
I say "as much as" b/c Amazon could always contract out LLW to strike back and buy those $9 books and sell them for $8.
And so on until $0 (or until they pay us to take them!).
By only buying the loss leading products (that Murdoch doesn't want sold at a loss anyway) he can make his  point WITHOUT having to quit selling the product to Amazon.
Done at enough volume it could certainly make a point.
And while this would not work nearly as well with tangible goods for various reasons (shipping, warehouseing, etc), it could certainly work some something that is simply transmitted down a wire.
Amazon can choose to (1) quit carrying the product or (2) raise the price to something they won't lose money on every time (3) keep doing the same thing and bleed to death $4 at a time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032074</id>
	<title>Missing the hidden market</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265400720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But just like the music industry, the book industry misses the larger market. With CDs costing 25 bucks a pop, I buy maybe half a dozen a year. If they cost only 10, I would buy them every week with the groceries. Same applies to books - they hit the shelves at 40/50, paperback at 20, and it's out of my "disposal unit price". Sell them at 10, and I'd buy tons of them, my impulse buy threshold has been reached. And the NET profit to the producers goes through the previous "roof".</p><p>The premium pricing model you describe aims to retain the "exclusivity" of the product, it's called skimming, and it's fucking stupid that old business insists on clinging to this outdated marketing model when the internet and other cheap comms and tech have clearly changed the way we live our lives. You offer no numbers about the cost of proofreading, and I'm a proofreader, so I know you're full of shit on that score. The retail costs of e-distribution are marginal at best, advertising dirt cheap. This leaves the author and editor, and neither of them really cost that much, except for sponsoring "hookers and blow" for the Murdoch's and prima donnas of yesteryear.</p><p>Nice lawn you had there, gran'pa - shame someone put a highway through it, eh?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But just like the music industry , the book industry misses the larger market .
With CDs costing 25 bucks a pop , I buy maybe half a dozen a year .
If they cost only 10 , I would buy them every week with the groceries .
Same applies to books - they hit the shelves at 40/50 , paperback at 20 , and it 's out of my " disposal unit price " .
Sell them at 10 , and I 'd buy tons of them , my impulse buy threshold has been reached .
And the NET profit to the producers goes through the previous " roof " .The premium pricing model you describe aims to retain the " exclusivity " of the product , it 's called skimming , and it 's fucking stupid that old business insists on clinging to this outdated marketing model when the internet and other cheap comms and tech have clearly changed the way we live our lives .
You offer no numbers about the cost of proofreading , and I 'm a proofreader , so I know you 're full of shit on that score .
The retail costs of e-distribution are marginal at best , advertising dirt cheap .
This leaves the author and editor , and neither of them really cost that much , except for sponsoring " hookers and blow " for the Murdoch 's and prima donnas of yesteryear.Nice lawn you had there , gran'pa - shame someone put a highway through it , eh ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But just like the music industry, the book industry misses the larger market.
With CDs costing 25 bucks a pop, I buy maybe half a dozen a year.
If they cost only 10, I would buy them every week with the groceries.
Same applies to books - they hit the shelves at 40/50, paperback at 20, and it's out of my "disposal unit price".
Sell them at 10, and I'd buy tons of them, my impulse buy threshold has been reached.
And the NET profit to the producers goes through the previous "roof".The premium pricing model you describe aims to retain the "exclusivity" of the product, it's called skimming, and it's fucking stupid that old business insists on clinging to this outdated marketing model when the internet and other cheap comms and tech have clearly changed the way we live our lives.
You offer no numbers about the cost of proofreading, and I'm a proofreader, so I know you're full of shit on that score.
The retail costs of e-distribution are marginal at best, advertising dirt cheap.
This leaves the author and editor, and neither of them really cost that much, except for sponsoring "hookers and blow" for the Murdoch's and prima donnas of yesteryear.Nice lawn you had there, gran'pa - shame someone put a highway through it, eh?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31039960</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math.</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1265367060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i># years you can own: personal best, 34<br></i><br>I have paperbacks I've had since the 1960s, and hardcover books that are older than I am.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext># years you can own : personal best , 34I have paperbacks I 've had since the 1960s , and hardcover books that are older than I am .</tokentext>
<sentencetext># years you can own: personal best, 34I have paperbacks I've had since the 1960s, and hardcover books that are older than I am.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030938</id>
	<title>Feudal corporatism in action</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1265303820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this is what happens when you let a handful of individuals own huge economic resources. they become like feudal lords, asserting their own will to majority of the people. here, behold, technology has improved, there is a possibility of cheaper goods being available to public. but, the feudal corporate structure doesnt want to let it happen. so much for 'free market', so much for 'invisible hand'. this is just in line with another observation i posted in a similar thread before :</p><p><a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1530508&amp;cid=31026562" title="slashdot.org">http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1530508&amp;cid=31026562</a> [slashdot.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this is what happens when you let a handful of individuals own huge economic resources .
they become like feudal lords , asserting their own will to majority of the people .
here , behold , technology has improved , there is a possibility of cheaper goods being available to public .
but , the feudal corporate structure doesnt want to let it happen .
so much for 'free market ' , so much for 'invisible hand' .
this is just in line with another observation i posted in a similar thread before : http : //slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1530508&amp;cid = 31026562 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this is what happens when you let a handful of individuals own huge economic resources.
they become like feudal lords, asserting their own will to majority of the people.
here, behold, technology has improved, there is a possibility of cheaper goods being available to public.
but, the feudal corporate structure doesnt want to let it happen.
so much for 'free market', so much for 'invisible hand'.
this is just in line with another observation i posted in a similar thread before :http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1530508&amp;cid=31026562 [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032004</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math.</title>
	<author>brit74</author>
	<datestamp>1265313420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Paperback: $7.00<br>
# times you can loan: personal best, oh, about 10<br>
# years you can own: personal best, 34<br>
Resale value: personal best, $27.00</i> <br>
<br>
I don't think "personal best" is the metric you should be using for a comparison here.  For a fair comparison, you should be talking averages.  I could also point out that my "personal best" stock investment netted me a 40\% return in six months, but that's that not a good argument for buying stocks since that return is not typical.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Paperback : $ 7.00 # times you can loan : personal best , oh , about 10 # years you can own : personal best , 34 Resale value : personal best , $ 27.00 I do n't think " personal best " is the metric you should be using for a comparison here .
For a fair comparison , you should be talking averages .
I could also point out that my " personal best " stock investment netted me a 40 \ % return in six months , but that 's that not a good argument for buying stocks since that return is not typical .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paperback: $7.00
# times you can loan: personal best, oh, about 10
# years you can own: personal best, 34
Resale value: personal best, $27.00 

I don't think "personal best" is the metric you should be using for a comparison here.
For a fair comparison, you should be talking averages.
I could also point out that my "personal best" stock investment netted me a 40\% return in six months, but that's that not a good argument for buying stocks since that return is not typical.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032166</id>
	<title>What happens to the paper books?</title>
	<author>LostMyBeaver</author>
	<datestamp>1265402640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am a huge fan of e-books and audio books. In fact, I went from reading 50-100 printed books per year to reading 3 or less since e-books and audio books won my heart.<br><br>This raises the question of archival. To this day, we find scrolls buried in the dead sea. We find clay tablets from Mesopotamia. The death of paper is a real issue since a major world wide energy crisis would mean the permanent loss of information. Let's imagine for a moment that another world war did in fact occur (not too hard to imagine at times sadly). Among the first attacks would be energy sources. After all, no energy = no weapons production. Attacking oil resources is also likely.<br><br>Whoever wins such a war might find it in their best interest to keep their opponents in the dark long enough to make them easily controlled afterwards. Energy resources not dependent on the grids would eventually run out. Solar cells and wind mills might keep working, but their resources will not be directed to protecting information, but instead to running hospitals and other critical systems.<br><br>Books MUST be printed. It is critical. There needs to be redundant storage houses around the world where at least one copy of each book printed is stored. Even if it's in a cardboard box in an abandoned mine.<br><br>What steps are being taken so that once devices like Kindle, iPad and the likes start making "Published direct to e-Book" popular to keep books archived. Amazon, B&amp;N, Borders and others should be required by law that for each book they publish "direct to e-book", they must use their "Print On Demand" systems to produce at least one copy to be stored at archival locations around the world in printed form.<br><br>I'm convinced that in countries like Norway (where I live) it is very likely the government would even sponser an archive here. We don't have a library on the scale of the Library of Congress, but we sure do have plenty of abandoned mines that can be used for archival.<br><br>I really hope that someone thinks about these problems before it's too late.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am a huge fan of e-books and audio books .
In fact , I went from reading 50-100 printed books per year to reading 3 or less since e-books and audio books won my heart.This raises the question of archival .
To this day , we find scrolls buried in the dead sea .
We find clay tablets from Mesopotamia .
The death of paper is a real issue since a major world wide energy crisis would mean the permanent loss of information .
Let 's imagine for a moment that another world war did in fact occur ( not too hard to imagine at times sadly ) .
Among the first attacks would be energy sources .
After all , no energy = no weapons production .
Attacking oil resources is also likely.Whoever wins such a war might find it in their best interest to keep their opponents in the dark long enough to make them easily controlled afterwards .
Energy resources not dependent on the grids would eventually run out .
Solar cells and wind mills might keep working , but their resources will not be directed to protecting information , but instead to running hospitals and other critical systems.Books MUST be printed .
It is critical .
There needs to be redundant storage houses around the world where at least one copy of each book printed is stored .
Even if it 's in a cardboard box in an abandoned mine.What steps are being taken so that once devices like Kindle , iPad and the likes start making " Published direct to e-Book " popular to keep books archived .
Amazon , B&amp;N , Borders and others should be required by law that for each book they publish " direct to e-book " , they must use their " Print On Demand " systems to produce at least one copy to be stored at archival locations around the world in printed form.I 'm convinced that in countries like Norway ( where I live ) it is very likely the government would even sponser an archive here .
We do n't have a library on the scale of the Library of Congress , but we sure do have plenty of abandoned mines that can be used for archival.I really hope that someone thinks about these problems before it 's too late .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am a huge fan of e-books and audio books.
In fact, I went from reading 50-100 printed books per year to reading 3 or less since e-books and audio books won my heart.This raises the question of archival.
To this day, we find scrolls buried in the dead sea.
We find clay tablets from Mesopotamia.
The death of paper is a real issue since a major world wide energy crisis would mean the permanent loss of information.
Let's imagine for a moment that another world war did in fact occur (not too hard to imagine at times sadly).
Among the first attacks would be energy sources.
After all, no energy = no weapons production.
Attacking oil resources is also likely.Whoever wins such a war might find it in their best interest to keep their opponents in the dark long enough to make them easily controlled afterwards.
Energy resources not dependent on the grids would eventually run out.
Solar cells and wind mills might keep working, but their resources will not be directed to protecting information, but instead to running hospitals and other critical systems.Books MUST be printed.
It is critical.
There needs to be redundant storage houses around the world where at least one copy of each book printed is stored.
Even if it's in a cardboard box in an abandoned mine.What steps are being taken so that once devices like Kindle, iPad and the likes start making "Published direct to e-Book" popular to keep books archived.
Amazon, B&amp;N, Borders and others should be required by law that for each book they publish "direct to e-book", they must use their "Print On Demand" systems to produce at least one copy to be stored at archival locations around the world in printed form.I'm convinced that in countries like Norway (where I live) it is very likely the government would even sponser an archive here.
We don't have a library on the scale of the Library of Congress, but we sure do have plenty of abandoned mines that can be used for archival.I really hope that someone thinks about these problems before it's too late.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031374</id>
	<title>Is it just me...</title>
	<author>Balial</author>
	<datestamp>1265307060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... or does Murdoch think books are just thicker newspapers?</p><p>This is exactly what he's been saying about (his) papers. However, I don't think it holds for books. People do actually like books and collecting them on bookshelves. They're unlike newspapers in many important ways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... or does Murdoch think books are just thicker newspapers ? This is exactly what he 's been saying about ( his ) papers .
However , I do n't think it holds for books .
People do actually like books and collecting them on bookshelves .
They 're unlike newspapers in many important ways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... or does Murdoch think books are just thicker newspapers?This is exactly what he's been saying about (his) papers.
However, I don't think it holds for books.
People do actually like books and collecting them on bookshelves.
They're unlike newspapers in many important ways.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031282</id>
	<title>Re:Prices</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265306400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry, but I call bullshit on that and Scalzi's little entry lacks in the important bit of some actual numbers. MacMillan Mac-Graw Hill, for instance, made 40 million in profits on sales of 275 million back in 1988. That's not a small margin by any stretch of the imagination. This whole 'publishing industry makes no money' is like how the movie industry claims it loses money on every movie.</p><p>Also, let's note that movies and music albums cost a shitload more to create then books and if the those companies are able to make a profit shipping products that cost the same, or less, then hardcover books at retail then I'd say the book industry needs to fix what its doing wrong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , but I call bullshit on that and Scalzi 's little entry lacks in the important bit of some actual numbers .
MacMillan Mac-Graw Hill , for instance , made 40 million in profits on sales of 275 million back in 1988 .
That 's not a small margin by any stretch of the imagination .
This whole 'publishing industry makes no money ' is like how the movie industry claims it loses money on every movie.Also , let 's note that movies and music albums cost a shitload more to create then books and if the those companies are able to make a profit shipping products that cost the same , or less , then hardcover books at retail then I 'd say the book industry needs to fix what its doing wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, but I call bullshit on that and Scalzi's little entry lacks in the important bit of some actual numbers.
MacMillan Mac-Graw Hill, for instance, made 40 million in profits on sales of 275 million back in 1988.
That's not a small margin by any stretch of the imagination.
This whole 'publishing industry makes no money' is like how the movie industry claims it loses money on every movie.Also, let's note that movies and music albums cost a shitload more to create then books and if the those companies are able to make a profit shipping products that cost the same, or less, then hardcover books at retail then I'd say the book industry needs to fix what its doing wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031692</id>
	<title>Re:So what he's saying is...</title>
	<author>ultramk</author>
	<datestamp>1265309760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is that this new market is artificially cheaper. Amazon forced publishers to sign them up as a sub publisher, which allowed them to set the prices of other people's content to below what the original publisher needs to make in order to stay in business.</p><p>The only reason Amazon is doing this is to entice people to buy their reader and get locked into their walled garden as quickly as possible before better alternatives come along. They don't mind running all of their publishers and by extension, authors, into the ground to make this happen.</p><p>Of course, I manage a small publishing company, so I'm not unbiased. I've worked with Amazon for years, and while on the physical book side they are pretty good to work with, on the ebook side they are just vicious, casting aside the long term for short term gain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that this new market is artificially cheaper .
Amazon forced publishers to sign them up as a sub publisher , which allowed them to set the prices of other people 's content to below what the original publisher needs to make in order to stay in business.The only reason Amazon is doing this is to entice people to buy their reader and get locked into their walled garden as quickly as possible before better alternatives come along .
They do n't mind running all of their publishers and by extension , authors , into the ground to make this happen.Of course , I manage a small publishing company , so I 'm not unbiased .
I 've worked with Amazon for years , and while on the physical book side they are pretty good to work with , on the ebook side they are just vicious , casting aside the long term for short term gain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that this new market is artificially cheaper.
Amazon forced publishers to sign them up as a sub publisher, which allowed them to set the prices of other people's content to below what the original publisher needs to make in order to stay in business.The only reason Amazon is doing this is to entice people to buy their reader and get locked into their walled garden as quickly as possible before better alternatives come along.
They don't mind running all of their publishers and by extension, authors, into the ground to make this happen.Of course, I manage a small publishing company, so I'm not unbiased.
I've worked with Amazon for years, and while on the physical book side they are pretty good to work with, on the ebook side they are just vicious, casting aside the long term for short term gain.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030786</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031360</id>
	<title>Re:Prices</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265307000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is misleading, as were the bunch of other similar posts in the last thread like this. Almost everyone who said the physical costs weren't much gave some cost breakdown in their post. Which attributed 40-50\% of the purchase price of a physical book to retail markup.</p><p>If so much of it is retail markup, then that should mean selling the ebook at 50-60\% should get them the same margin plus $4 per copy. This should follow the same pricing pattern as the physical books did from hardcover to softcover, except with the bigger margin the "hardcover" to "softcover" ebook pricing transition could progress faster.</p><p>Or, for the especially stingy, a publisher could do physical hardcover only at first, then release the ebook at the same time as the paperback. The ebook could cost a LOT less than the physical paperback, yet make the publisher more per copy, since, again, no retail markup and no $4/copy printing cost and shipping cost. If the paperback is already out, and that means the up-front expenses have already been paid off, then I see no reason why the ebook shouldn't be $5. By your own math, the publisher's only getting pennies for the paperback, but they'd be getting like $4 for the $5 ebook.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is misleading , as were the bunch of other similar posts in the last thread like this .
Almost everyone who said the physical costs were n't much gave some cost breakdown in their post .
Which attributed 40-50 \ % of the purchase price of a physical book to retail markup.If so much of it is retail markup , then that should mean selling the ebook at 50-60 \ % should get them the same margin plus $ 4 per copy .
This should follow the same pricing pattern as the physical books did from hardcover to softcover , except with the bigger margin the " hardcover " to " softcover " ebook pricing transition could progress faster.Or , for the especially stingy , a publisher could do physical hardcover only at first , then release the ebook at the same time as the paperback .
The ebook could cost a LOT less than the physical paperback , yet make the publisher more per copy , since , again , no retail markup and no $ 4/copy printing cost and shipping cost .
If the paperback is already out , and that means the up-front expenses have already been paid off , then I see no reason why the ebook should n't be $ 5 .
By your own math , the publisher 's only getting pennies for the paperback , but they 'd be getting like $ 4 for the $ 5 ebook .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is misleading, as were the bunch of other similar posts in the last thread like this.
Almost everyone who said the physical costs weren't much gave some cost breakdown in their post.
Which attributed 40-50\% of the purchase price of a physical book to retail markup.If so much of it is retail markup, then that should mean selling the ebook at 50-60\% should get them the same margin plus $4 per copy.
This should follow the same pricing pattern as the physical books did from hardcover to softcover, except with the bigger margin the "hardcover" to "softcover" ebook pricing transition could progress faster.Or, for the especially stingy, a publisher could do physical hardcover only at first, then release the ebook at the same time as the paperback.
The ebook could cost a LOT less than the physical paperback, yet make the publisher more per copy, since, again, no retail markup and no $4/copy printing cost and shipping cost.
If the paperback is already out, and that means the up-front expenses have already been paid off, then I see no reason why the ebook shouldn't be $5.
By your own math, the publisher's only getting pennies for the paperback, but they'd be getting like $4 for the $5 ebook.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031020</id>
	<title>Re:Books vs. E-books</title>
	<author>Zerth</author>
	<datestamp>1265304420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As much as I like having shelves and shelves of books, I'm really paying for the data, not the storage.  If an ebook is the cheapest, I buy it unless it is on a very short list of authors I like in hardback.</p><p>If, for some idiotic reason, the ebook costs <b>more</b> than cutting down a tree, pulping it, and printing words on the dried remains, then I buy the paperback and warez the ebook(or drop it in the hopper of the industrial scanner at work).</p><p>And I imagine the publisher doesn't make as much the second way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As much as I like having shelves and shelves of books , I 'm really paying for the data , not the storage .
If an ebook is the cheapest , I buy it unless it is on a very short list of authors I like in hardback.If , for some idiotic reason , the ebook costs more than cutting down a tree , pulping it , and printing words on the dried remains , then I buy the paperback and warez the ebook ( or drop it in the hopper of the industrial scanner at work ) .And I imagine the publisher does n't make as much the second way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As much as I like having shelves and shelves of books, I'm really paying for the data, not the storage.
If an ebook is the cheapest, I buy it unless it is on a very short list of authors I like in hardback.If, for some idiotic reason, the ebook costs more than cutting down a tree, pulping it, and printing words on the dried remains, then I buy the paperback and warez the ebook(or drop it in the hopper of the industrial scanner at work).And I imagine the publisher doesn't make as much the second way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030840</id>
	<title>Books</title>
	<author>Chris Lawrence</author>
	<datestamp>1265303040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Paper books will always live.  One the one hand, there are still a billion people in the world without access to regular electricity.  On the other, we might have limited resources in the future to make new electronic devices, due to peak oil and climate change.  Yet, we can always make paper on a small, local scale if necessary.  But electronic devices require a large industrial infrastructure.</p><p>After all, we have thousands of years of written human history, but only a tiny moment of digital history.  It would be presumptuous of us to assume the latter will last longer than the former.</p><p><a href="http://www.selfdestructivebastards.com/2009/10/ebooks-versus-paper.html" title="selfdestru...stards.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.selfdestructivebastards.com/2009/10/ebooks-versus-paper.html</a> [selfdestru...stards.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Paper books will always live .
One the one hand , there are still a billion people in the world without access to regular electricity .
On the other , we might have limited resources in the future to make new electronic devices , due to peak oil and climate change .
Yet , we can always make paper on a small , local scale if necessary .
But electronic devices require a large industrial infrastructure.After all , we have thousands of years of written human history , but only a tiny moment of digital history .
It would be presumptuous of us to assume the latter will last longer than the former.http : //www.selfdestructivebastards.com/2009/10/ebooks-versus-paper.html [ selfdestru...stards.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paper books will always live.
One the one hand, there are still a billion people in the world without access to regular electricity.
On the other, we might have limited resources in the future to make new electronic devices, due to peak oil and climate change.
Yet, we can always make paper on a small, local scale if necessary.
But electronic devices require a large industrial infrastructure.After all, we have thousands of years of written human history, but only a tiny moment of digital history.
It would be presumptuous of us to assume the latter will last longer than the former.http://www.selfdestructivebastards.com/2009/10/ebooks-versus-paper.html [selfdestru...stards.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031236</id>
	<title>Re:Just let Ebooks die already</title>
	<author>smash</author>
	<datestamp>1265306160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I reckon the idea has potential if its a subscription based service.  I.e., pay $foo/month and get access to anything in the library on demand.  Things like service manuals really have potential if they end up in an augmented reality format.... which would only probably be 10 years off being consumer-level stuff at a guess.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I reckon the idea has potential if its a subscription based service .
I.e. , pay $ foo/month and get access to anything in the library on demand .
Things like service manuals really have potential if they end up in an augmented reality format.... which would only probably be 10 years off being consumer-level stuff at a guess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I reckon the idea has potential if its a subscription based service.
I.e., pay $foo/month and get access to anything in the library on demand.
Things like service manuals really have potential if they end up in an augmented reality format.... which would only probably be 10 years off being consumer-level stuff at a guess.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030850</id>
	<title>The information market was like the housing market</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265303100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Information has artificially inflated in value.  The prices coming down are a natural result of people realizing this.</p><p>We have been paying too much for books, films, and music for years.  Party's over.  They still get to make profit, just not obscene profit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Information has artificially inflated in value .
The prices coming down are a natural result of people realizing this.We have been paying too much for books , films , and music for years .
Party 's over .
They still get to make profit , just not obscene profit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Information has artificially inflated in value.
The prices coming down are a natural result of people realizing this.We have been paying too much for books, films, and music for years.
Party's over.
They still get to make profit, just not obscene profit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032774</id>
	<title>Re:Change doesn't always destroy</title>
	<author>imakemusic</author>
	<datestamp>1265367720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>because there's nothing like actually having it in your hands</p></div><p>Until, of course, there <em>is</em> something like actually having it in your hands.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>because there 's nothing like actually having it in your handsUntil , of course , there is something like actually having it in your hands .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>because there's nothing like actually having it in your handsUntil, of course, there is something like actually having it in your hands.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031090</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031530</id>
	<title>There's a place for eBooks.</title>
	<author>Lord Kano</author>
	<datestamp>1265308320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just not in my house. I might download a PDF, but if I'm paying I want a tangible book. I want something that I can read without the publisher having the ability to revoke it or remotely deactivate it.</p><p>LK</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just not in my house .
I might download a PDF , but if I 'm paying I want a tangible book .
I want something that I can read without the publisher having the ability to revoke it or remotely deactivate it.LK</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just not in my house.
I might download a PDF, but if I'm paying I want a tangible book.
I want something that I can read without the publisher having the ability to revoke it or remotely deactivate it.LK</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030864</id>
	<title>iPad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265303160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When the iPad was announced, I thought to myself - there isn't really a use for that.</p><p>Later, it occurred to me - if you subscribe to magazines and newspapers, and read them at home a lot - it is actually quite attractive, in an expensive apple solution way... maybe not for me, but for some people, who enjoy those types of publications at home - sure. Could actually be the saviour of magazine and news bulletin styles of things, now I think about it, if enough cool people start subscribing, rather than just reading the articles (that are made available online). Interactive and updated content, plus web usage to help it along... sure, could be good for that.</p><p>Of course, Mr Murdoch has the opposite view - it's a destroyer, not an enabler. Oh well... it surely won't be too long before he has to hand over control of News Ltd to someone with at least a tiny bit of forward thinking inside the skull.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When the iPad was announced , I thought to myself - there is n't really a use for that.Later , it occurred to me - if you subscribe to magazines and newspapers , and read them at home a lot - it is actually quite attractive , in an expensive apple solution way... maybe not for me , but for some people , who enjoy those types of publications at home - sure .
Could actually be the saviour of magazine and news bulletin styles of things , now I think about it , if enough cool people start subscribing , rather than just reading the articles ( that are made available online ) .
Interactive and updated content , plus web usage to help it along... sure , could be good for that.Of course , Mr Murdoch has the opposite view - it 's a destroyer , not an enabler .
Oh well... it surely wo n't be too long before he has to hand over control of News Ltd to someone with at least a tiny bit of forward thinking inside the skull .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When the iPad was announced, I thought to myself - there isn't really a use for that.Later, it occurred to me - if you subscribe to magazines and newspapers, and read them at home a lot - it is actually quite attractive, in an expensive apple solution way... maybe not for me, but for some people, who enjoy those types of publications at home - sure.
Could actually be the saviour of magazine and news bulletin styles of things, now I think about it, if enough cool people start subscribing, rather than just reading the articles (that are made available online).
Interactive and updated content, plus web usage to help it along... sure, could be good for that.Of course, Mr Murdoch has the opposite view - it's a destroyer, not an enabler.
Oh well... it surely won't be too long before he has to hand over control of News Ltd to someone with at least a tiny bit of forward thinking inside the skull.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031300</id>
	<title>Ayn Rand flashback</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265306520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Murdoch's comments read like quotations from "Atlas Shrugged". He's like James Taggart whining about how it is unfair for others to compete with he and his friends.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Murdoch 's comments read like quotations from " Atlas Shrugged " .
He 's like James Taggart whining about how it is unfair for others to compete with he and his friends .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Murdoch's comments read like quotations from "Atlas Shrugged".
He's like James Taggart whining about how it is unfair for others to compete with he and his friends.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033254</id>
	<title>something murdoch has not considered</title>
	<author>FudRucker</author>
	<datestamp>1265375040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Paper books do not require an expensive electronic device that includes requiring batteries, and there is no fear of some draconian overlord shutting off your electronic book gadget or deleting books out of it...
<br> <br>
no thanks murdick i think i will stick with old fashioned paper/pulp books</htmltext>
<tokenext>Paper books do not require an expensive electronic device that includes requiring batteries , and there is no fear of some draconian overlord shutting off your electronic book gadget or deleting books out of it.. . no thanks murdick i think i will stick with old fashioned paper/pulp books</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paper books do not require an expensive electronic device that includes requiring batteries, and there is no fear of some draconian overlord shutting off your electronic book gadget or deleting books out of it...
 
no thanks murdick i think i will stick with old fashioned paper/pulp books</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31037816</id>
	<title>Re:9.99 isn't CHEAP for an ebook you don't own</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1265400960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>My friends, particularly the ones still in their 20's, think I am insane. "But dood, yo can get itoonz in like one click!" they say. Those are the people who will probably buy an e-book.</i></p><p>They're also the ones who will stop at the convinience store on the way home and pay $3.50 for a loaf of bread you can buy at a real grocery for $1.00 and a 4 oz can of coffee for the same price you'd pay for a pound, and who buy bottled water even though what's in most public water systems.</p><p>In short, they're stupid people with more dollars than sense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My friends , particularly the ones still in their 20 's , think I am insane .
" But dood , yo can get itoonz in like one click !
" they say .
Those are the people who will probably buy an e-book.They 're also the ones who will stop at the convinience store on the way home and pay $ 3.50 for a loaf of bread you can buy at a real grocery for $ 1.00 and a 4 oz can of coffee for the same price you 'd pay for a pound , and who buy bottled water even though what 's in most public water systems.In short , they 're stupid people with more dollars than sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My friends, particularly the ones still in their 20's, think I am insane.
"But dood, yo can get itoonz in like one click!
" they say.
Those are the people who will probably buy an e-book.They're also the ones who will stop at the convinience store on the way home and pay $3.50 for a loaf of bread you can buy at a real grocery for $1.00 and a 4 oz can of coffee for the same price you'd pay for a pound, and who buy bottled water even though what's in most public water systems.In short, they're stupid people with more dollars than sense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031280</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031630</id>
	<title>Of Course it devalues Books</title>
	<author>secondhand\_Buddah</author>
	<datestamp>1265309160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Value is based on the principal of scarcity. With print medium the publishers could control the scarcity, AND create the demand through marketing, thereby increasing the value i.e. the price. But when talking about profit margins, I will hazard a calculated guess and say that e-books are far more profitable even at the lower price point. <br>
The real issue here is that Murdoch and other redundant publishers no longer get to control the scarcity in the market, plus with the lowered cost barriers to market entry,  a LOT more fish are now feeding in the same pond.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Value is based on the principal of scarcity .
With print medium the publishers could control the scarcity , AND create the demand through marketing , thereby increasing the value i.e .
the price .
But when talking about profit margins , I will hazard a calculated guess and say that e-books are far more profitable even at the lower price point .
The real issue here is that Murdoch and other redundant publishers no longer get to control the scarcity in the market , plus with the lowered cost barriers to market entry , a LOT more fish are now feeding in the same pond .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Value is based on the principal of scarcity.
With print medium the publishers could control the scarcity, AND create the demand through marketing, thereby increasing the value i.e.
the price.
But when talking about profit margins, I will hazard a calculated guess and say that e-books are far more profitable even at the lower price point.
The real issue here is that Murdoch and other redundant publishers no longer get to control the scarcity in the market, plus with the lowered cost barriers to market entry,  a LOT more fish are now feeding in the same pond.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031722</id>
	<title>Re:One other thing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265309940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>dead tree books.. dead tree books... dead tree books..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>dead tree books.. dead tree books... dead tree books. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>dead tree books.. dead tree books... dead tree books..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032946</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math.</title>
	<author>Vlobulle</author>
	<datestamp>1265370180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pirated eBook: $0.00<br># times you can loan: unlimited<br># years you can own: unlimited<br>Resale value: $0.00</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pirated eBook : $ 0.00 # times you can loan : unlimited # years you can own : unlimitedResale value : $ 0.00</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pirated eBook: $0.00# times you can loan: unlimited# years you can own: unlimitedResale value: $0.00</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032520</id>
	<title>the French are not surrendering</title>
	<author>obarthelemy</author>
	<datestamp>1265364300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>what we've been doing for years is: enforcing a fixed price for books. The price depends on the number of pages, and soft vs hard cover.Specialty books (art, school...) are exempt I think. As are second-hand books.</p><p>They idea is to keep French authors and editors thriving, and to keep quality up. I think it's kinda working:</p><p>- though books are rather expensive, there's a lot of public libraries for when you can't afford them.<br>- publishers and above all resellers don't care which book they sell, just how many, which gives them an incentive to be neutral and actually try and give good advice. Contrast that to what happens when you set foot in a computer shop, and have the sales-contest-of-the-week crap pushed at you.<br>- even obscure authors have a chance at making reasonable money off their sales (either for them or their publishers, but that another question).</p><p>I'm not a fan of regulation, but I do think books make a reasonable exception.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>what we 've been doing for years is : enforcing a fixed price for books .
The price depends on the number of pages , and soft vs hard cover.Specialty books ( art , school... ) are exempt I think .
As are second-hand books.They idea is to keep French authors and editors thriving , and to keep quality up .
I think it 's kinda working : - though books are rather expensive , there 's a lot of public libraries for when you ca n't afford them.- publishers and above all resellers do n't care which book they sell , just how many , which gives them an incentive to be neutral and actually try and give good advice .
Contrast that to what happens when you set foot in a computer shop , and have the sales-contest-of-the-week crap pushed at you.- even obscure authors have a chance at making reasonable money off their sales ( either for them or their publishers , but that another question ) .I 'm not a fan of regulation , but I do think books make a reasonable exception .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>what we've been doing for years is: enforcing a fixed price for books.
The price depends on the number of pages, and soft vs hard cover.Specialty books (art, school...) are exempt I think.
As are second-hand books.They idea is to keep French authors and editors thriving, and to keep quality up.
I think it's kinda working:- though books are rather expensive, there's a lot of public libraries for when you can't afford them.- publishers and above all resellers don't care which book they sell, just how many, which gives them an incentive to be neutral and actually try and give good advice.
Contrast that to what happens when you set foot in a computer shop, and have the sales-contest-of-the-week crap pushed at you.- even obscure authors have a chance at making reasonable money off their sales (either for them or their publishers, but that another question).I'm not a fan of regulation, but I do think books make a reasonable exception.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031074</id>
	<title>The price is right.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265304780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I download eBooks for free from various sites, then print and bind them using my employer's resources.</p><p>The people who produce paper, toner and comb binding equipment can't lose. Not to mention that my employer pays someone good money for the bandwidth I consume.</p><p>Sounds like much ado about nothing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I download eBooks for free from various sites , then print and bind them using my employer 's resources.The people who produce paper , toner and comb binding equipment ca n't lose .
Not to mention that my employer pays someone good money for the bandwidth I consume.Sounds like much ado about nothing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I download eBooks for free from various sites, then print and bind them using my employer's resources.The people who produce paper, toner and comb binding equipment can't lose.
Not to mention that my employer pays someone good money for the bandwidth I consume.Sounds like much ado about nothing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031154</id>
	<title>Re:Paper trumps electronic</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1265305500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You don't have to worry so much about a paperback. I can smack my son (allegedly) with it when he acts like a kook.</p> </div><p>The new standard for child abuse: paperback vs. hardcover. Do large-format paperbacks count? Rolled-up copies of Tintin?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I can treat my book like the $6.00 price it cost.</p></div><p>...seven or eight years ago, maybe. I don't remember the last time I saw a paperback that cheap on the new shelf.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I know this is an old argument. I am an old dude, (allegedly), but I see what my son reads. And how he reads, and he decidedly did not want an e-reader for his reading needs.</p></div><p>Too bad, you could have got him onto project Gutenberg.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I just wish I could buy books printed on hemp like God intended.!</p></div><p>Pretty sure most trees are seed-bearing plants, as is cotton.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't have to worry so much about a paperback .
I can smack my son ( allegedly ) with it when he acts like a kook .
The new standard for child abuse : paperback vs. hardcover. Do large-format paperbacks count ?
Rolled-up copies of Tintin ? I can treat my book like the $ 6.00 price it cost....seven or eight years ago , maybe .
I do n't remember the last time I saw a paperback that cheap on the new shelf.I know this is an old argument .
I am an old dude , ( allegedly ) , but I see what my son reads .
And how he reads , and he decidedly did not want an e-reader for his reading needs.Too bad , you could have got him onto project Gutenberg.I just wish I could buy books printed on hemp like God intended .
! Pretty sure most trees are seed-bearing plants , as is cotton .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't have to worry so much about a paperback.
I can smack my son (allegedly) with it when he acts like a kook.
The new standard for child abuse: paperback vs. hardcover. Do large-format paperbacks count?
Rolled-up copies of Tintin?I can treat my book like the $6.00 price it cost....seven or eight years ago, maybe.
I don't remember the last time I saw a paperback that cheap on the new shelf.I know this is an old argument.
I am an old dude, (allegedly), but I see what my son reads.
And how he reads, and he decidedly did not want an e-reader for his reading needs.Too bad, you could have got him onto project Gutenberg.I just wish I could buy books printed on hemp like God intended.
!Pretty sure most trees are seed-bearing plants, as is cotton.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034502</id>
	<title>You really don't understand publishers, do you?</title>
	<author>Garwulf</author>
	<datestamp>1265385540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry, but I find this quite uninformed:</p><p>"It's understandable that the publishers don't like this, in general. For one, they understand hardcovers and paperbacks, but can't quite get their heads wrapped around an eBook as being something different. They want it to be a hardcover, Amazon wants it to be a paperback, but delivered at about the same time as a hardcover. I think, in reality, this is a different form, and needs to be treated as such. For one, there are lots of publisher's expenses associated with a hardcover: printing fees, distribution, in-store kiosks, maybe shelving fees, etc. All of these, at the very least, should be subtracted from the retail price and the publisher's piece of the book sale. Otherwise, they're going to be using this as a trick to increase revenues, even though they're performing significantly less of a service."</p><p>I've been in the publishing industry in some way, shape, or form since 1998, when I made my first article sale.  My first book sale was in 2000 - and the reason I'm telling you this is because my first book sale was the Diablo e-book that launched the entire Blizzard fiction line.  So, I have some inkling about what was going on behind the scenes - I was there.</p><p>The first thing you have to understand is that publishers are early adapters.  There have been several revolutions behind the scenes, such as using email for manuscript submissions, electronic presses, and print-on-demand.  So, when the e-book looked like it was going to make a massive impact on the way we read, and might even replace the print book, they decided to see what this thing could do.  And believe me, they picked up on the whole "reduced production costs" right from the get-go.  This was back around 1999-2000.  Certain publishers launched e-book projects to push the format and see how far it would go, and the others watched very carefully.</p><p>My e-book, Demonsbane, was commissioned in large part to help in the attempt to blow open the market.  It was carefully selected, both in content and length.  To prevent possible reader fatigue, the word count was limited to 30,000 words.  The franchise it was based on had just sold over a million copies of Diablo II, and had a large group of tech-savvy people on Battle.net who were likely to be early adapters.  So, built in fan base - check.  Tech-savvy potential customers - check.  Distribution across several formats and from several online resellers - check.  Behind the scenes, the editor, myself, and even my favorite author, had worked our collective hindquarters off to make sure it was a good read.  The only thing that wasn't going for this book was that I wasn't Stephen King.  If something was going to take off and be a success, it was this e-book.  It even launched on Halloween, 2000, and was advertised for months on Battle.net.</p><p>It tanked.</p><p>All the noise about there being a massive e-book market was just noise.  The factors I mentioned helped - and Demonsbane sold a couple of hundred copies per year while other e-books were selling two or three copies in the same time.  Across the board, e-book attempts failed, and by 2003 publishers had identified e-books as a niche market, good for some inexpensive marketing more than anything else.</p><p>Now, others here have already dispelled the fallacy that the major cost is production and distribution - so I won't go into details there.  But...</p><p>Ten years later, we can track the progress of the e-book.  According to the latest figures from the Association of American Publishers, the e-book occupied 2.26\% of the total book market in November 2009.  That's it.  The audio book did marginally better.  The majority of the market prefers a printed book - and your customers dictate to you, not vice versa.</p><p>So, publishers DO understand the e-book and what it's capable of.  They're not dinosaurs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , but I find this quite uninformed : " It 's understandable that the publishers do n't like this , in general .
For one , they understand hardcovers and paperbacks , but ca n't quite get their heads wrapped around an eBook as being something different .
They want it to be a hardcover , Amazon wants it to be a paperback , but delivered at about the same time as a hardcover .
I think , in reality , this is a different form , and needs to be treated as such .
For one , there are lots of publisher 's expenses associated with a hardcover : printing fees , distribution , in-store kiosks , maybe shelving fees , etc .
All of these , at the very least , should be subtracted from the retail price and the publisher 's piece of the book sale .
Otherwise , they 're going to be using this as a trick to increase revenues , even though they 're performing significantly less of a service .
" I 've been in the publishing industry in some way , shape , or form since 1998 , when I made my first article sale .
My first book sale was in 2000 - and the reason I 'm telling you this is because my first book sale was the Diablo e-book that launched the entire Blizzard fiction line .
So , I have some inkling about what was going on behind the scenes - I was there.The first thing you have to understand is that publishers are early adapters .
There have been several revolutions behind the scenes , such as using email for manuscript submissions , electronic presses , and print-on-demand .
So , when the e-book looked like it was going to make a massive impact on the way we read , and might even replace the print book , they decided to see what this thing could do .
And believe me , they picked up on the whole " reduced production costs " right from the get-go .
This was back around 1999-2000 .
Certain publishers launched e-book projects to push the format and see how far it would go , and the others watched very carefully.My e-book , Demonsbane , was commissioned in large part to help in the attempt to blow open the market .
It was carefully selected , both in content and length .
To prevent possible reader fatigue , the word count was limited to 30,000 words .
The franchise it was based on had just sold over a million copies of Diablo II , and had a large group of tech-savvy people on Battle.net who were likely to be early adapters .
So , built in fan base - check .
Tech-savvy potential customers - check .
Distribution across several formats and from several online resellers - check .
Behind the scenes , the editor , myself , and even my favorite author , had worked our collective hindquarters off to make sure it was a good read .
The only thing that was n't going for this book was that I was n't Stephen King .
If something was going to take off and be a success , it was this e-book .
It even launched on Halloween , 2000 , and was advertised for months on Battle.net.It tanked.All the noise about there being a massive e-book market was just noise .
The factors I mentioned helped - and Demonsbane sold a couple of hundred copies per year while other e-books were selling two or three copies in the same time .
Across the board , e-book attempts failed , and by 2003 publishers had identified e-books as a niche market , good for some inexpensive marketing more than anything else.Now , others here have already dispelled the fallacy that the major cost is production and distribution - so I wo n't go into details there .
But...Ten years later , we can track the progress of the e-book .
According to the latest figures from the Association of American Publishers , the e-book occupied 2.26 \ % of the total book market in November 2009 .
That 's it .
The audio book did marginally better .
The majority of the market prefers a printed book - and your customers dictate to you , not vice versa.So , publishers DO understand the e-book and what it 's capable of .
They 're not dinosaurs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, but I find this quite uninformed:"It's understandable that the publishers don't like this, in general.
For one, they understand hardcovers and paperbacks, but can't quite get their heads wrapped around an eBook as being something different.
They want it to be a hardcover, Amazon wants it to be a paperback, but delivered at about the same time as a hardcover.
I think, in reality, this is a different form, and needs to be treated as such.
For one, there are lots of publisher's expenses associated with a hardcover: printing fees, distribution, in-store kiosks, maybe shelving fees, etc.
All of these, at the very least, should be subtracted from the retail price and the publisher's piece of the book sale.
Otherwise, they're going to be using this as a trick to increase revenues, even though they're performing significantly less of a service.
"I've been in the publishing industry in some way, shape, or form since 1998, when I made my first article sale.
My first book sale was in 2000 - and the reason I'm telling you this is because my first book sale was the Diablo e-book that launched the entire Blizzard fiction line.
So, I have some inkling about what was going on behind the scenes - I was there.The first thing you have to understand is that publishers are early adapters.
There have been several revolutions behind the scenes, such as using email for manuscript submissions, electronic presses, and print-on-demand.
So, when the e-book looked like it was going to make a massive impact on the way we read, and might even replace the print book, they decided to see what this thing could do.
And believe me, they picked up on the whole "reduced production costs" right from the get-go.
This was back around 1999-2000.
Certain publishers launched e-book projects to push the format and see how far it would go, and the others watched very carefully.My e-book, Demonsbane, was commissioned in large part to help in the attempt to blow open the market.
It was carefully selected, both in content and length.
To prevent possible reader fatigue, the word count was limited to 30,000 words.
The franchise it was based on had just sold over a million copies of Diablo II, and had a large group of tech-savvy people on Battle.net who were likely to be early adapters.
So, built in fan base - check.
Tech-savvy potential customers - check.
Distribution across several formats and from several online resellers - check.
Behind the scenes, the editor, myself, and even my favorite author, had worked our collective hindquarters off to make sure it was a good read.
The only thing that wasn't going for this book was that I wasn't Stephen King.
If something was going to take off and be a success, it was this e-book.
It even launched on Halloween, 2000, and was advertised for months on Battle.net.It tanked.All the noise about there being a massive e-book market was just noise.
The factors I mentioned helped - and Demonsbane sold a couple of hundred copies per year while other e-books were selling two or three copies in the same time.
Across the board, e-book attempts failed, and by 2003 publishers had identified e-books as a niche market, good for some inexpensive marketing more than anything else.Now, others here have already dispelled the fallacy that the major cost is production and distribution - so I won't go into details there.
But...Ten years later, we can track the progress of the e-book.
According to the latest figures from the Association of American Publishers, the e-book occupied 2.26\% of the total book market in November 2009.
That's it.
The audio book did marginally better.
The majority of the market prefers a printed book - and your customers dictate to you, not vice versa.So, publishers DO understand the e-book and what it's capable of.
They're not dinosaurs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032228</id>
	<title>i have an important opinion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265360520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ebooks should be $1-3.<br>mp3s should be 10 cents per song.<br>flacs should be 20 cents per song.<br>movies should be $1-10.<br>games should be $1-10.</p><p>all with no drm.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ebooks should be $ 1-3.mp3s should be 10 cents per song.flacs should be 20 cents per song.movies should be $ 1-10.games should be $ 1-10.all with no drm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ebooks should be $1-3.mp3s should be 10 cents per song.flacs should be 20 cents per song.movies should be $1-10.games should be $1-10.all with no drm.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031588</id>
	<title>Murdoch is odious - but correct</title>
	<author>Savior\_on\_a\_Stick</author>
	<datestamp>1265308680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If anyone actually READ TFA....</p><p>He's a private party negotiating with another private party.</p><p>He objects to his customers cannibalizing his business through unfair competition.</p><p>At no point does TFA make any sort of reference to him trying to outlaw anything.</p><p>Amazon is putting downward pressure on book prices, and since Murdoch - like most slashdotters - expects old style book publishing to remain a viable business, it makes sense for him to want to resist long term devaluation of his product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If anyone actually READ TFA....He 's a private party negotiating with another private party.He objects to his customers cannibalizing his business through unfair competition.At no point does TFA make any sort of reference to him trying to outlaw anything.Amazon is putting downward pressure on book prices , and since Murdoch - like most slashdotters - expects old style book publishing to remain a viable business , it makes sense for him to want to resist long term devaluation of his product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If anyone actually READ TFA....He's a private party negotiating with another private party.He objects to his customers cannibalizing his business through unfair competition.At no point does TFA make any sort of reference to him trying to outlaw anything.Amazon is putting downward pressure on book prices, and since Murdoch - like most slashdotters - expects old style book publishing to remain a viable business, it makes sense for him to want to resist long term devaluation of his product.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033366</id>
	<title>Some of us want to move on, just give us the choic</title>
	<author>halowolf</author>
	<datestamp>1265376420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I might be able to consider his point of view if I didn't feel as if I was getting ripped off with paper based books. On many occasions new books have come out that I wan't to read that are in those horrible big hardcover sizes but are made like paperbacks with hard cover prices. That I do not like. Often these books take far longer to come down to a manageable size than the hardcover to paperback transition that used to happen in a timely manner.

Not requiring a massive bag to carry around something to read would be nice when I have some travelling to do but want to travel light.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I might be able to consider his point of view if I did n't feel as if I was getting ripped off with paper based books .
On many occasions new books have come out that I wa n't to read that are in those horrible big hardcover sizes but are made like paperbacks with hard cover prices .
That I do not like .
Often these books take far longer to come down to a manageable size than the hardcover to paperback transition that used to happen in a timely manner .
Not requiring a massive bag to carry around something to read would be nice when I have some travelling to do but want to travel light .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I might be able to consider his point of view if I didn't feel as if I was getting ripped off with paper based books.
On many occasions new books have come out that I wan't to read that are in those horrible big hardcover sizes but are made like paperbacks with hard cover prices.
That I do not like.
Often these books take far longer to come down to a manageable size than the hardcover to paperback transition that used to happen in a timely manner.
Not requiring a massive bag to carry around something to read would be nice when I have some travelling to do but want to travel light.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030952</id>
	<title>Paper trumps electronic</title>
	<author>crotherm</author>
	<datestamp>1265303940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>e-readers have their place.   I'd say it would be for viewing more dynamic docs or quick reference over a networked feed for tech docs.  Paper books, for me, are not replaceable.  You don't have to worry so much about a paperback.  I can smack my son (allegedly) with it when he acts like a kook.  I can throw it off a twenty story building and it still works.  I can treat my book like the $6.00 price it cost.</p><p>I know this is an old argument.  I am an old dude, (allegedly), but I see what my son reads.  And how he reads, and he decidedly did not want an e-reader for his reading needs.</p><p>I just wish I could buy books printed on hemp like God intended.!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>e-readers have their place .
I 'd say it would be for viewing more dynamic docs or quick reference over a networked feed for tech docs .
Paper books , for me , are not replaceable .
You do n't have to worry so much about a paperback .
I can smack my son ( allegedly ) with it when he acts like a kook .
I can throw it off a twenty story building and it still works .
I can treat my book like the $ 6.00 price it cost.I know this is an old argument .
I am an old dude , ( allegedly ) , but I see what my son reads .
And how he reads , and he decidedly did not want an e-reader for his reading needs.I just wish I could buy books printed on hemp like God intended .
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>e-readers have their place.
I'd say it would be for viewing more dynamic docs or quick reference over a networked feed for tech docs.
Paper books, for me, are not replaceable.
You don't have to worry so much about a paperback.
I can smack my son (allegedly) with it when he acts like a kook.
I can throw it off a twenty story building and it still works.
I can treat my book like the $6.00 price it cost.I know this is an old argument.
I am an old dude, (allegedly), but I see what my son reads.
And how he reads, and he decidedly did not want an e-reader for his reading needs.I just wish I could buy books printed on hemp like God intended.
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032654</id>
	<title>Re:9.99 isn't CHEAP for an ebook you don't own</title>
	<author>JasterBobaMereel</author>
	<datestamp>1265366040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>....now take a book to the beach</p><p>and watch the guy with the kindle squint to read the same as a ebook, then bet on if his batteries will fail before the kindle dies due to overheating in the sun, or becomes unusable due to salt or sand damage?</p><p>ebooks are now at least usable,  but the readers are still too expensive and fragile to replace books (so far<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...)</p><p>When the readers are much less fragile, and come down in price, then perhaps the book printing industry will contract, but if the publishers are smart they will carry one as they are currently,  ie. here is a book, how do you want it,  hardcover, softcover, ebook, audiobook<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>....now take a book to the beachand watch the guy with the kindle squint to read the same as a ebook , then bet on if his batteries will fail before the kindle dies due to overheating in the sun , or becomes unusable due to salt or sand damage ? ebooks are now at least usable , but the readers are still too expensive and fragile to replace books ( so far ... ) When the readers are much less fragile , and come down in price , then perhaps the book printing industry will contract , but if the publishers are smart they will carry one as they are currently , ie .
here is a book , how do you want it , hardcover , softcover , ebook , audiobook .... ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>....now take a book to the beachand watch the guy with the kindle squint to read the same as a ebook, then bet on if his batteries will fail before the kindle dies due to overheating in the sun, or becomes unusable due to salt or sand damage?ebooks are now at least usable,  but the readers are still too expensive and fragile to replace books (so far ...)When the readers are much less fragile, and come down in price, then perhaps the book printing industry will contract, but if the publishers are smart they will carry one as they are currently,  ie.
here is a book, how do you want it,  hardcover, softcover, ebook, audiobook .... ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31037166</id>
	<title>file this under never</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265397780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>lol yeah right lot's of ppl hate ebooks. Books have survived a long time, longer then tapes,cd,and mp3. Not likely print will go away.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>lol yeah right lot 's of ppl hate ebooks .
Books have survived a long time , longer then tapes,cd,and mp3 .
Not likely print will go away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>lol yeah right lot's of ppl hate ebooks.
Books have survived a long time, longer then tapes,cd,and mp3.
Not likely print will go away.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034864</id>
	<title>Hardcover books</title>
	<author>JustNiz</author>
	<datestamp>1265387700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He says that this hurts  retailers of hardcover books, well good.<br>Hardcover books have been subverted into a restrictive market scam to allow them to charge double or more for a book in first the year of publication. I'll be glad to see an alternative to that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He says that this hurts retailers of hardcover books , well good.Hardcover books have been subverted into a restrictive market scam to allow them to charge double or more for a book in first the year of publication .
I 'll be glad to see an alternative to that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He says that this hurts  retailers of hardcover books, well good.Hardcover books have been subverted into a restrictive market scam to allow them to charge double or more for a book in first the year of publication.
I'll be glad to see an alternative to that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031908</id>
	<title>Re:Just let Ebooks die already</title>
	<author>Hadlock</author>
	<datestamp>1265312160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mostly we're waiting on the price of e-ink tech to come down to commodity prices. Right now there's only one (two?) producers and the price remains high because they're having to pay down their R&amp;D costs from the last 20 years, plus the fact that they have a monopoly on the technology. Eventually an A4/Letter sized sheet of e-ink, plus it's controller will only cost $99-120. At that point it'll become useful again and you'll see people like me buying them so they can get the NYT and WSJ subscriptions on them. I almost picked up a $500 Kindle DX + NYT subscription, but then the economy collapsed.<br>
&nbsp; <br>I agree with you, most people aren't interested in buying and reading books electronically. I buy all my books at Half Priced Books because there's more "classics" written in the last 20 years than I will ever have time to read in my lifetime. But people can read the news more quickly and easily on an e-reader and I think ultimately that is where the e-reader market is headed. E-textbooks and E-novels are only small slices of the e-reader market in the long run.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mostly we 're waiting on the price of e-ink tech to come down to commodity prices .
Right now there 's only one ( two ?
) producers and the price remains high because they 're having to pay down their R&amp;D costs from the last 20 years , plus the fact that they have a monopoly on the technology .
Eventually an A4/Letter sized sheet of e-ink , plus it 's controller will only cost $ 99-120 .
At that point it 'll become useful again and you 'll see people like me buying them so they can get the NYT and WSJ subscriptions on them .
I almost picked up a $ 500 Kindle DX + NYT subscription , but then the economy collapsed .
  I agree with you , most people are n't interested in buying and reading books electronically .
I buy all my books at Half Priced Books because there 's more " classics " written in the last 20 years than I will ever have time to read in my lifetime .
But people can read the news more quickly and easily on an e-reader and I think ultimately that is where the e-reader market is headed .
E-textbooks and E-novels are only small slices of the e-reader market in the long run .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mostly we're waiting on the price of e-ink tech to come down to commodity prices.
Right now there's only one (two?
) producers and the price remains high because they're having to pay down their R&amp;D costs from the last 20 years, plus the fact that they have a monopoly on the technology.
Eventually an A4/Letter sized sheet of e-ink, plus it's controller will only cost $99-120.
At that point it'll become useful again and you'll see people like me buying them so they can get the NYT and WSJ subscriptions on them.
I almost picked up a $500 Kindle DX + NYT subscription, but then the economy collapsed.
  I agree with you, most people aren't interested in buying and reading books electronically.
I buy all my books at Half Priced Books because there's more "classics" written in the last 20 years than I will ever have time to read in my lifetime.
But people can read the news more quickly and easily on an e-reader and I think ultimately that is where the e-reader market is headed.
E-textbooks and E-novels are only small slices of the e-reader market in the long run.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032158</id>
	<title>and yet</title>
	<author>AnAdventurer</author>
	<datestamp>1265402280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You still can't use you device for that first 20 minutes or so on a plane and you don't have to worry about running out of batteries halfway up Kilimanjaro.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You still ca n't use you device for that first 20 minutes or so on a plane and you do n't have to worry about running out of batteries halfway up Kilimanjaro .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You still can't use you device for that first 20 minutes or so on a plane and you don't have to worry about running out of batteries halfway up Kilimanjaro.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031026</id>
	<title>Look! I'm Rupert Murdoch!</title>
	<author>shovas</author>
	<datestamp>1265304420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Bla bla bla. Bla bla bla bla, bla bla bla bla bla."</p></div><p>Honestly, even the mainstream media knows, from articles I've seen in newspapers, that this guy's acting out in something approaching infirmity.</p><p>I've got all kinds of sympathy for dying businesses, until they start bringing out absurd, unreasonable arguments to defend why their business should still be profitable in a changing market.</p><p>Capitalism, free market and socialist policies are all aided by the concept of survival of the fittest: Adapt or die, Murdoch.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Bla bla bla .
Bla bla bla bla , bla bla bla bla bla .
" Honestly , even the mainstream media knows , from articles I 've seen in newspapers , that this guy 's acting out in something approaching infirmity.I 've got all kinds of sympathy for dying businesses , until they start bringing out absurd , unreasonable arguments to defend why their business should still be profitable in a changing market.Capitalism , free market and socialist policies are all aided by the concept of survival of the fittest : Adapt or die , Murdoch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Bla bla bla.
Bla bla bla bla, bla bla bla bla bla.
"Honestly, even the mainstream media knows, from articles I've seen in newspapers, that this guy's acting out in something approaching infirmity.I've got all kinds of sympathy for dying businesses, until they start bringing out absurd, unreasonable arguments to defend why their business should still be profitable in a changing market.Capitalism, free market and socialist policies are all aided by the concept of survival of the fittest: Adapt or die, Murdoch.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031616</id>
	<title>Re:iPad</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1265308920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I noticed that pictures advertising the iPad always have the New York Times front and center. I think a deal has already been done between Apple and News Corp.</p></div><p>Seeing as News Corp doesn't own the New York Times, I don't see why you'd reach that conclusion. It is owned by The New York Times Company, based in Manhattan.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I noticed that pictures advertising the iPad always have the New York Times front and center .
I think a deal has already been done between Apple and News Corp.Seeing as News Corp does n't own the New York Times , I do n't see why you 'd reach that conclusion .
It is owned by The New York Times Company , based in Manhattan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I noticed that pictures advertising the iPad always have the New York Times front and center.
I think a deal has already been done between Apple and News Corp.Seeing as News Corp doesn't own the New York Times, I don't see why you'd reach that conclusion.
It is owned by The New York Times Company, based in Manhattan.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031036</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031170</id>
	<title>Cheaper to produce...</title>
	<author>Fallen Kell</author>
	<datestamp>1265305620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hey guess what, it is cheaper to produce and distribute an electronic file than it is to cut down trees, chip trees up into pulp, soak pulp in chemicals, dry pulp into thin sheets, run thin sheets through monster machine that presses ink onto sheets, pile sheets in specific order on top of each other, cut sheets to uniform size, bind sheets together with glue with a thicker cover sheet/cardboard/particle board, put bound copy in contain with other bound copies, ship around world to store...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey guess what , it is cheaper to produce and distribute an electronic file than it is to cut down trees , chip trees up into pulp , soak pulp in chemicals , dry pulp into thin sheets , run thin sheets through monster machine that presses ink onto sheets , pile sheets in specific order on top of each other , cut sheets to uniform size , bind sheets together with glue with a thicker cover sheet/cardboard/particle board , put bound copy in contain with other bound copies , ship around world to store.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey guess what, it is cheaper to produce and distribute an electronic file than it is to cut down trees, chip trees up into pulp, soak pulp in chemicals, dry pulp into thin sheets, run thin sheets through monster machine that presses ink onto sheets, pile sheets in specific order on top of each other, cut sheets to uniform size, bind sheets together with glue with a thicker cover sheet/cardboard/particle board, put bound copy in contain with other bound copies, ship around world to store...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034074</id>
	<title>Oh, please</title>
	<author>Kartu</author>
	<datestamp>1265382900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>To create a good boook, you need:
1) A good writer
2) ok editor

That's how it worked for centuries. And neither 1) nor 2) is expensive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>To create a good boook , you need : 1 ) A good writer 2 ) ok editor That 's how it worked for centuries .
And neither 1 ) nor 2 ) is expensive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To create a good boook, you need:
1) A good writer
2) ok editor

That's how it worked for centuries.
And neither 1) nor 2) is expensive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031536</id>
	<title>Furthermore</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265308320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After which he went on to berate Smithers before tapping his fingers together and saying "eeexcellent"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After which he went on to berate Smithers before tapping his fingers together and saying " eeexcellent "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After which he went on to berate Smithers before tapping his fingers together and saying "eeexcellent"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031774</id>
	<title>Re:So what he's saying is...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265310540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How can I pay money to see more news from this "Murdoch" guy?</p></div><p>I think you just have to subscribe to his newsletter.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How can I pay money to see more news from this " Murdoch " guy ? I think you just have to subscribe to his newsletter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How can I pay money to see more news from this "Murdoch" guy?I think you just have to subscribe to his newsletter.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030786</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031032</id>
	<title>Re:Price??!?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265304480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>This. I can get most anything I want, which includes some pretty niche history books, for about $5-8 used on Amazon, shipping included. I can't figure out why I'd want to pay $10, much less $15 for a DRM'd ebook that I'm only allowed to read on certain devices, I can't sell or donate, etc.
<br> <br>
The only advantage I see is search. I can't instantly search a dead-tree book. Though again, that depends on if the supported software even allows that. And it's entirely irrelevant for fiction.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This .
I can get most anything I want , which includes some pretty niche history books , for about $ 5-8 used on Amazon , shipping included .
I ca n't figure out why I 'd want to pay $ 10 , much less $ 15 for a DRM 'd ebook that I 'm only allowed to read on certain devices , I ca n't sell or donate , etc .
The only advantage I see is search .
I ca n't instantly search a dead-tree book .
Though again , that depends on if the supported software even allows that .
And it 's entirely irrelevant for fiction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This.
I can get most anything I want, which includes some pretty niche history books, for about $5-8 used on Amazon, shipping included.
I can't figure out why I'd want to pay $10, much less $15 for a DRM'd ebook that I'm only allowed to read on certain devices, I can't sell or donate, etc.
The only advantage I see is search.
I can't instantly search a dead-tree book.
Though again, that depends on if the supported software even allows that.
And it's entirely irrelevant for fiction.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031112</id>
	<title>I hate books. period.</title>
	<author>dangil</author>
	<datestamp>1265305200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hate dead tree books.. they are heavy, awkward to hold, no backlite, no search
<br>
I hate ebooks. expensive, you don't own them, needs power
<br>
I hate books. too long, full of pointless drivel. every chapter repeating the last.
<br>
text is too low a bitrate for me... I get bored easly.
<br>
also, I have an hypothesis. People with Myopia usually like to read , because upclose they see better, with less effort. I have hypermetropia, and for me to focus on near objects requires a lot of effort giving me huge asthenopia (even with the correct glasses). And because of that I hate to read long books.
<br>
audio-books are even worse... I can't concentrate on a guy reading a dumb text in a monotone voice. and when they have actors, they usually suck
<br>
I like reading wikipedia entries for books.. it sums it up pretty nice for me. really compressed bitrate (thou lossy)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate dead tree books.. they are heavy , awkward to hold , no backlite , no search I hate ebooks .
expensive , you do n't own them , needs power I hate books .
too long , full of pointless drivel .
every chapter repeating the last .
text is too low a bitrate for me... I get bored easly .
also , I have an hypothesis .
People with Myopia usually like to read , because upclose they see better , with less effort .
I have hypermetropia , and for me to focus on near objects requires a lot of effort giving me huge asthenopia ( even with the correct glasses ) .
And because of that I hate to read long books .
audio-books are even worse... I ca n't concentrate on a guy reading a dumb text in a monotone voice .
and when they have actors , they usually suck I like reading wikipedia entries for books.. it sums it up pretty nice for me .
really compressed bitrate ( thou lossy )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate dead tree books.. they are heavy, awkward to hold, no backlite, no search

I hate ebooks.
expensive, you don't own them, needs power

I hate books.
too long, full of pointless drivel.
every chapter repeating the last.
text is too low a bitrate for me... I get bored easly.
also, I have an hypothesis.
People with Myopia usually like to read , because upclose they see better, with less effort.
I have hypermetropia, and for me to focus on near objects requires a lot of effort giving me huge asthenopia (even with the correct glasses).
And because of that I hate to read long books.
audio-books are even worse... I can't concentrate on a guy reading a dumb text in a monotone voice.
and when they have actors, they usually suck

I like reading wikipedia entries for books.. it sums it up pretty nice for me.
really compressed bitrate (thou lossy)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031306</id>
	<title>Re:Books</title>
	<author>masmullin</author>
	<datestamp>1265306520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Disagree... paper's days are limited as a mass media medium.  Sure we'll still have limited paper runs for certain "classics" and for official documents.  But your general "Michael Crichton" book will no longer come in paper format.  This is of course once we've figured out how to do the ebook properly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Disagree... paper 's days are limited as a mass media medium .
Sure we 'll still have limited paper runs for certain " classics " and for official documents .
But your general " Michael Crichton " book will no longer come in paper format .
This is of course once we 've figured out how to do the ebook properly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Disagree... paper's days are limited as a mass media medium.
Sure we'll still have limited paper runs for certain "classics" and for official documents.
But your general "Michael Crichton" book will no longer come in paper format.
This is of course once we've figured out how to do the ebook properly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030840</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031194</id>
	<title>Re:Prices</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1265305800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But ebooks can be on the market for decades after they are written. Electronic book stores can hold millions of titles. The books never go out of stock and, while some will reduce in value, others will increase.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But ebooks can be on the market for decades after they are written .
Electronic book stores can hold millions of titles .
The books never go out of stock and , while some will reduce in value , others will increase .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But ebooks can be on the market for decades after they are written.
Electronic book stores can hold millions of titles.
The books never go out of stock and, while some will reduce in value, others will increase.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033658</id>
	<title>Save the trees!</title>
	<author>codeButcher</author>
	<datestamp>1265379660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've just completed a SF book, playing some centuries in the future, where the electronic tablet-style reader/clipboard is ubiquitous. (Might I also add that this book comes from the Bean free library and is stored on a micro SD card, together with a good-sized bookshelf's worth of its ilk, and being read on my VGA-resolution PDA (sans phone).)
</p><p>While I do think that that's a good way to store and read texts that you'll probably never read a second time, as opposed to the dead tree version, and while I think that size, robustness (reading in the bathtub - or shower), and battery life issues are probably going to be resolved by and by, I do not think that e-book readers are anything but a transitional phase which we will have outgrown in a century or so at the latest.
</p><p>Why have a specialised device that can only do one thing? I find my PDA much more convenient, as it allows me to do word processing, spreadsheet calculations, browsing, address book and appointments, music, games, book reading, etc. etc. I've found that convergence is not a bad thing (AS LONG AS the functions are still performed adequately!).
</p><p>The main game changer will be heads-up displays. I mean unobtrusive, mainstream, and of an adequate resolution. At that point you don't need to lug around a large display - optics handle the size - and computing becomes wearable. A processing unit as large as a modern mobile will provide sufficient power for most tasks and is easy enough to carry around.
</p><p>So my bet is that digital functions will become closer and closer integrated with humans, and will probably be all but invisible in a century or so. Paper books? What a quaint idea. E-book reader? Your HUD in for repairs dude? Poor you. People vacantly staring into the distance on the subway, some twitching fingers at times? Quite possible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've just completed a SF book , playing some centuries in the future , where the electronic tablet-style reader/clipboard is ubiquitous .
( Might I also add that this book comes from the Bean free library and is stored on a micro SD card , together with a good-sized bookshelf 's worth of its ilk , and being read on my VGA-resolution PDA ( sans phone ) .
) While I do think that that 's a good way to store and read texts that you 'll probably never read a second time , as opposed to the dead tree version , and while I think that size , robustness ( reading in the bathtub - or shower ) , and battery life issues are probably going to be resolved by and by , I do not think that e-book readers are anything but a transitional phase which we will have outgrown in a century or so at the latest .
Why have a specialised device that can only do one thing ?
I find my PDA much more convenient , as it allows me to do word processing , spreadsheet calculations , browsing , address book and appointments , music , games , book reading , etc .
etc. I 've found that convergence is not a bad thing ( AS LONG AS the functions are still performed adequately ! ) .
The main game changer will be heads-up displays .
I mean unobtrusive , mainstream , and of an adequate resolution .
At that point you do n't need to lug around a large display - optics handle the size - and computing becomes wearable .
A processing unit as large as a modern mobile will provide sufficient power for most tasks and is easy enough to carry around .
So my bet is that digital functions will become closer and closer integrated with humans , and will probably be all but invisible in a century or so .
Paper books ?
What a quaint idea .
E-book reader ?
Your HUD in for repairs dude ?
Poor you .
People vacantly staring into the distance on the subway , some twitching fingers at times ?
Quite possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've just completed a SF book, playing some centuries in the future, where the electronic tablet-style reader/clipboard is ubiquitous.
(Might I also add that this book comes from the Bean free library and is stored on a micro SD card, together with a good-sized bookshelf's worth of its ilk, and being read on my VGA-resolution PDA (sans phone).
)
While I do think that that's a good way to store and read texts that you'll probably never read a second time, as opposed to the dead tree version, and while I think that size, robustness (reading in the bathtub - or shower), and battery life issues are probably going to be resolved by and by, I do not think that e-book readers are anything but a transitional phase which we will have outgrown in a century or so at the latest.
Why have a specialised device that can only do one thing?
I find my PDA much more convenient, as it allows me to do word processing, spreadsheet calculations, browsing, address book and appointments, music, games, book reading, etc.
etc. I've found that convergence is not a bad thing (AS LONG AS the functions are still performed adequately!).
The main game changer will be heads-up displays.
I mean unobtrusive, mainstream, and of an adequate resolution.
At that point you don't need to lug around a large display - optics handle the size - and computing becomes wearable.
A processing unit as large as a modern mobile will provide sufficient power for most tasks and is easy enough to carry around.
So my bet is that digital functions will become closer and closer integrated with humans, and will probably be all but invisible in a century or so.
Paper books?
What a quaint idea.
E-book reader?
Your HUD in for repairs dude?
Poor you.
People vacantly staring into the distance on the subway, some twitching fingers at times?
Quite possible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031636</id>
	<title>You have it backwards</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265309220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Price fixing is when multiple producers of a similar product collude to fix the price at which all of them will sell.</p><p>That's essentially what Amazon is trying to do.</p><p>It's not price fixing to sell to your wholesale customers in a contractual arrangement that includes a retail price floor.</p><p>This is called business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Price fixing is when multiple producers of a similar product collude to fix the price at which all of them will sell.That 's essentially what Amazon is trying to do.It 's not price fixing to sell to your wholesale customers in a contractual arrangement that includes a retail price floor.This is called business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Price fixing is when multiple producers of a similar product collude to fix the price at which all of them will sell.That's essentially what Amazon is trying to do.It's not price fixing to sell to your wholesale customers in a contractual arrangement that includes a retail price floor.This is called business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031056</id>
	<title>Re:9.99 isn't CHEAP for an ebook you don't own</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265304660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you bought it from Barnes and Noble, you *can* loan it.  The loanee gets a copy that "expires" after two weeks.  I'm not sure if you are allowed to read your own copy during this time, though.  I haven't got a Nook, nor any friends with one to try it with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you bought it from Barnes and Noble , you * can * loan it .
The loanee gets a copy that " expires " after two weeks .
I 'm not sure if you are allowed to read your own copy during this time , though .
I have n't got a Nook , nor any friends with one to try it with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you bought it from Barnes and Noble, you *can* loan it.
The loanee gets a copy that "expires" after two weeks.
I'm not sure if you are allowed to read your own copy during this time, though.
I haven't got a Nook, nor any friends with one to try it with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031462</id>
	<title>Re:Price??!?</title>
	<author>Demonantis</author>
	<datestamp>1265307780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think its more that the people that just want the book are heavily subsidizing the price of premium paper books. Once people move to e-books, paper will become more expensive or e-books will come down in price as the market establishes itself.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think its more that the people that just want the book are heavily subsidizing the price of premium paper books .
Once people move to e-books , paper will become more expensive or e-books will come down in price as the market establishes itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think its more that the people that just want the book are heavily subsidizing the price of premium paper books.
Once people move to e-books, paper will become more expensive or e-books will come down in price as the market establishes itself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032682</id>
	<title>Re:Prices</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265366520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Retail markup makes almost half the cost of a book - and almost all of it should disappear for an ebook.  No renting shopfronts in the middle of town; no paid staff sitting behind a counter.  Just a few cents of electricity, bandwidth and server time to run a transaction.  Plus the costs of setting up the server in the first place, with a payment system, etc - but that's divided over all the books that are sold, so ~$1 sounds reasonable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Retail markup makes almost half the cost of a book - and almost all of it should disappear for an ebook .
No renting shopfronts in the middle of town ; no paid staff sitting behind a counter .
Just a few cents of electricity , bandwidth and server time to run a transaction .
Plus the costs of setting up the server in the first place , with a payment system , etc - but that 's divided over all the books that are sold , so ~ $ 1 sounds reasonable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Retail markup makes almost half the cost of a book - and almost all of it should disappear for an ebook.
No renting shopfronts in the middle of town; no paid staff sitting behind a counter.
Just a few cents of electricity, bandwidth and server time to run a transaction.
Plus the costs of setting up the server in the first place, with a payment system, etc - but that's divided over all the books that are sold, so ~$1 sounds reasonable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031912</id>
	<title>Re:One other thing</title>
	<author>Ithelrand</author>
	<datestamp>1265312160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Carbon sequestering books, perhaps?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Carbon sequestering books , perhaps ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Carbon sequestering books, perhaps?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032760</id>
	<title>Re:Prices</title>
	<author>imrehg</author>
	<datestamp>1265367480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is wrong because actually printing a book is the smallest cost involved in making one. When you look at the price of, say, a $35 hardcover book perhaps $4 is physical costs. Almost all of the cost of a book is the cost of paying the author/editor/proofreader plus the retail markup. These costs remain the same regardless of format.</p></div><p>This reasoning is just because of a (very) wrong assumption: all costs are created equal... That's just not true. <b>The printing, packaging, etc. are fixed costs and proportional to the number of books you make.</b> Thus producing 1million copies will be much more expensive than 1000....</p><p> <b>The author's, editor's, proofreader's, etc... costs are,</b> on the other hand, <b>"cuts" in the total, and completely arbitrarily defined.</b> Imagine an author where they say, let's cut our commission from X\% to X/2\%, which will cut the price of the book. In turn, more people buys the book, and if it's completely sane to imagine, that they can have x2 the sales for that price cut (as the author's share was a big proportion of the price). In the end, the author can make more money because of the larger volume then with it's original cut. And since all these costs are arbitrary, they are flexible...</p><p>On the other hand, it's a prisoners' dilemma: if everyone would cut a bit of their share [or effectively keep the same share (after manufacturing costs) but drop the price] they would make a lot more money! Just they are too greedy &amp; stupid (dangerous combination) to realize that...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is wrong because actually printing a book is the smallest cost involved in making one .
When you look at the price of , say , a $ 35 hardcover book perhaps $ 4 is physical costs .
Almost all of the cost of a book is the cost of paying the author/editor/proofreader plus the retail markup .
These costs remain the same regardless of format.This reasoning is just because of a ( very ) wrong assumption : all costs are created equal... That 's just not true .
The printing , packaging , etc .
are fixed costs and proportional to the number of books you make .
Thus producing 1million copies will be much more expensive than 1000.... The author 's , editor 's , proofreader 's , etc... costs are , on the other hand , " cuts " in the total , and completely arbitrarily defined .
Imagine an author where they say , let 's cut our commission from X \ % to X/2 \ % , which will cut the price of the book .
In turn , more people buys the book , and if it 's completely sane to imagine , that they can have x2 the sales for that price cut ( as the author 's share was a big proportion of the price ) .
In the end , the author can make more money because of the larger volume then with it 's original cut .
And since all these costs are arbitrary , they are flexible...On the other hand , it 's a prisoners ' dilemma : if everyone would cut a bit of their share [ or effectively keep the same share ( after manufacturing costs ) but drop the price ] they would make a lot more money !
Just they are too greedy &amp; stupid ( dangerous combination ) to realize that.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is wrong because actually printing a book is the smallest cost involved in making one.
When you look at the price of, say, a $35 hardcover book perhaps $4 is physical costs.
Almost all of the cost of a book is the cost of paying the author/editor/proofreader plus the retail markup.
These costs remain the same regardless of format.This reasoning is just because of a (very) wrong assumption: all costs are created equal... That's just not true.
The printing, packaging, etc.
are fixed costs and proportional to the number of books you make.
Thus producing 1million copies will be much more expensive than 1000.... The author's, editor's, proofreader's, etc... costs are, on the other hand, "cuts" in the total, and completely arbitrarily defined.
Imagine an author where they say, let's cut our commission from X\% to X/2\%, which will cut the price of the book.
In turn, more people buys the book, and if it's completely sane to imagine, that they can have x2 the sales for that price cut (as the author's share was a big proportion of the price).
In the end, the author can make more money because of the larger volume then with it's original cut.
And since all these costs are arbitrary, they are flexible...On the other hand, it's a prisoners' dilemma: if everyone would cut a bit of their share [or effectively keep the same share (after manufacturing costs) but drop the price] they would make a lot more money!
Just they are too greedy &amp; stupid (dangerous combination) to realize that...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031246</id>
	<title>Re:Prices</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265306220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All these go away:<br>1) Cost of printing<br>2) Cost of distribution<br>3) Cost of warehouses<br>4) Cost of B&amp;M Store<br>5) Cost of markup</p><p>$35 hard cover book in B&amp;M<br>50\% B&amp;M retail markup goes away though amazon</p><p>$17.5 book on amazon<br>$5 savings for no printing, no distribution, no warehouses.</p><p>$12.5 e-book</p><p>Tell me again why a brand new $35 hardcover book in B&amp;M shouldn't be sold as a $12.5 ebook?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All these go away : 1 ) Cost of printing2 ) Cost of distribution3 ) Cost of warehouses4 ) Cost of B&amp;M Store5 ) Cost of markup $ 35 hard cover book in B&amp;M50 \ % B&amp;M retail markup goes away though amazon $ 17.5 book on amazon $ 5 savings for no printing , no distribution , no warehouses. $ 12.5 e-bookTell me again why a brand new $ 35 hardcover book in B&amp;M should n't be sold as a $ 12.5 ebook ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All these go away:1) Cost of printing2) Cost of distribution3) Cost of warehouses4) Cost of B&amp;M Store5) Cost of markup$35 hard cover book in B&amp;M50\% B&amp;M retail markup goes away though amazon$17.5 book on amazon$5 savings for no printing, no distribution, no warehouses.$12.5 e-bookTell me again why a brand new $35 hardcover book in B&amp;M shouldn't be sold as a $12.5 ebook?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031814</id>
	<title>Re:9.99 isn't CHEAP for an ebook you don't own</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265311080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just to complete the thought, by our loaning, selling or donating physical books, the original publisher loses out completely, while in a digital world, the publisher would sell even more copies. Hence, e-books should be considerably cheaper than physical books minus the cost of printing and distribution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just to complete the thought , by our loaning , selling or donating physical books , the original publisher loses out completely , while in a digital world , the publisher would sell even more copies .
Hence , e-books should be considerably cheaper than physical books minus the cost of printing and distribution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just to complete the thought, by our loaning, selling or donating physical books, the original publisher loses out completely, while in a digital world, the publisher would sell even more copies.
Hence, e-books should be considerably cheaper than physical books minus the cost of printing and distribution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31036156</id>
	<title>Re:One other thing</title>
	<author>geminidomino</author>
	<datestamp>1265393520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>no one seems to cry when a pot plant gets smoked...</p></div><p>You must be new here. Allow me to introduce Initech's brand new invention. We call them "Republicans." We think they'll be a big hit.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>no one seems to cry when a pot plant gets smoked...You must be new here .
Allow me to introduce Initech 's brand new invention .
We call them " Republicans .
" We think they 'll be a big hit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no one seems to cry when a pot plant gets smoked...You must be new here.
Allow me to introduce Initech's brand new invention.
We call them "Republicans.
" We think they'll be a big hit.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031310</id>
	<title>Library</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265306580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I will just continue going to my public library free of charge....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I will just continue going to my public library free of charge... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I will just continue going to my public library free of charge....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031640</id>
	<title>Re:This just in...</title>
	<author>electrons\_are\_brave</author>
	<datestamp>1265309220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>To make it worse, he has no excuse. The music industry does, they were the first to miss the boat on digital content. The movie industry should have caught on, but somehow didn't. The publishers should really have been able to figure it out; they had fair warning and opportunity and, seemingly, just couldn't connect the dots.</p><p>Big Content screwed up and is on the way out no matter how much they complain. Books are absolutely here to stay, but the profit model is shifting. Hopefully the huge economies of scale afforded by e-Books will allow the authors to profit more than under the current model. In any case, Amazon is sure to come out on top for the near future.</p></div><p>I don't quite agree with the analogy with music. People were downloading music files en masse and the recording industry was still refusing to budge their business model from the good ol' CD days. We had ipods in Australia before we had any real ability to buy music online (legally). With books, the situation is different - how many people download books compared with how many people buy them? This is not consumer-driven - it is a reaction of the publishers who can see the writing on the wall with the ever-improving technology of ebook readers. </p><p>

My other issue with the book/music comparison is that bands can use give-away (or sold very cheaply) music to promote the other things that make money for them (tours, merchandise etc). Writers (and I'm thinking here of literary writers) don't have the capacity to do that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>To make it worse , he has no excuse .
The music industry does , they were the first to miss the boat on digital content .
The movie industry should have caught on , but somehow did n't .
The publishers should really have been able to figure it out ; they had fair warning and opportunity and , seemingly , just could n't connect the dots.Big Content screwed up and is on the way out no matter how much they complain .
Books are absolutely here to stay , but the profit model is shifting .
Hopefully the huge economies of scale afforded by e-Books will allow the authors to profit more than under the current model .
In any case , Amazon is sure to come out on top for the near future.I do n't quite agree with the analogy with music .
People were downloading music files en masse and the recording industry was still refusing to budge their business model from the good ol ' CD days .
We had ipods in Australia before we had any real ability to buy music online ( legally ) .
With books , the situation is different - how many people download books compared with how many people buy them ?
This is not consumer-driven - it is a reaction of the publishers who can see the writing on the wall with the ever-improving technology of ebook readers .
My other issue with the book/music comparison is that bands can use give-away ( or sold very cheaply ) music to promote the other things that make money for them ( tours , merchandise etc ) .
Writers ( and I 'm thinking here of literary writers ) do n't have the capacity to do that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To make it worse, he has no excuse.
The music industry does, they were the first to miss the boat on digital content.
The movie industry should have caught on, but somehow didn't.
The publishers should really have been able to figure it out; they had fair warning and opportunity and, seemingly, just couldn't connect the dots.Big Content screwed up and is on the way out no matter how much they complain.
Books are absolutely here to stay, but the profit model is shifting.
Hopefully the huge economies of scale afforded by e-Books will allow the authors to profit more than under the current model.
In any case, Amazon is sure to come out on top for the near future.I don't quite agree with the analogy with music.
People were downloading music files en masse and the recording industry was still refusing to budge their business model from the good ol' CD days.
We had ipods in Australia before we had any real ability to buy music online (legally).
With books, the situation is different - how many people download books compared with how many people buy them?
This is not consumer-driven - it is a reaction of the publishers who can see the writing on the wall with the ever-improving technology of ebook readers.
My other issue with the book/music comparison is that bands can use give-away (or sold very cheaply) music to promote the other things that make money for them (tours, merchandise etc).
Writers (and I'm thinking here of literary writers) don't have the capacity to do that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031030</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035114</id>
	<title>Paperback</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1265389080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p># times people see the cover and start talking to you about: 2x per book.
</p><p># times you can scribble a comment in the margin: not infinite but a lot.
</p><p># times you find a rare first edition: 1.
</p><p># times you can get the author to sign your copy: 1.
</p><p># times you can crack the spine of your virgin book: 1.
</p><p># times you can buy a paper book for the price of kindle: 40.
</p><p># times you inherited a book from your great-grandmother you never met because of WW2: 1.
</p><p>Oh and no point for an ebook list with the same because they would ALL be 0.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext># times people see the cover and start talking to you about : 2x per book .
# times you can scribble a comment in the margin : not infinite but a lot .
# times you find a rare first edition : 1 .
# times you can get the author to sign your copy : 1 .
# times you can crack the spine of your virgin book : 1 .
# times you can buy a paper book for the price of kindle : 40 .
# times you inherited a book from your great-grandmother you never met because of WW2 : 1 .
Oh and no point for an ebook list with the same because they would ALL be 0 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext># times people see the cover and start talking to you about: 2x per book.
# times you can scribble a comment in the margin: not infinite but a lot.
# times you find a rare first edition: 1.
# times you can get the author to sign your copy: 1.
# times you can crack the spine of your virgin book: 1.
# times you can buy a paper book for the price of kindle: 40.
# times you inherited a book from your great-grandmother you never met because of WW2: 1.
Oh and no point for an ebook list with the same because they would ALL be 0.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032794</id>
	<title>Re:One other thing</title>
	<author>Tapewolf</author>
	<datestamp>1265368020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Printing paper is not made from mahogany felled in virgin rainforests.  In the UK at least, it is made from fast-growing trees like pine which are grown specifically for the purpose of making it and continuously replanted as the more mature trees are felled.  So ultimately, the demand for paper ensures that the forest itself is being preserved.  If the demand for paper from commercial forests dried up the land would probably be turned into parking lots or houses instead.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Printing paper is not made from mahogany felled in virgin rainforests .
In the UK at least , it is made from fast-growing trees like pine which are grown specifically for the purpose of making it and continuously replanted as the more mature trees are felled .
So ultimately , the demand for paper ensures that the forest itself is being preserved .
If the demand for paper from commercial forests dried up the land would probably be turned into parking lots or houses instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Printing paper is not made from mahogany felled in virgin rainforests.
In the UK at least, it is made from fast-growing trees like pine which are grown specifically for the purpose of making it and continuously replanted as the more mature trees are felled.
So ultimately, the demand for paper ensures that the forest itself is being preserved.
If the demand for paper from commercial forests dried up the land would probably be turned into parking lots or houses instead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</id>
	<title>Prices</title>
	<author>Telvin\_3d</author>
	<datestamp>1265304720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a preemptive reply to the ten million people who are about to post variations on the following theme<br>"e-books should only cost a few dollars because they don't have the cost of printing/shipping/storing a book"</p><p>This is wrong.</p><p>This is wrong because actually printing a book is the smallest cost involved in making one. When you look at the price of, say, a $35 hardcover book perhaps $4 is physical costs. Almost all of the cost of a book is the cost of paying the author/editor/proofreader plus the retail markup. These costs remain the same regardless of format.</p><p>And you will note that I have not mentioned publisher's profit. That's because there basically isn't one. Publishing is notorious for having no profit margin. Always has been. It was famous for not making money a century ago, famous for it fifty years ago and still a great way to get well known while losing money today. Publishing is not the music industry and it is not the movie industry. Almost all the profit is spent in up-front costs before the product even hits the streets.</p><p>Because of this, publishing has always had a very sane pricing policy. First they publish the hardcover for a high price point. Everyone who can't wait to read it buys it. Then if it is popular enough to pay off the costs six months or a year later they produce a softcover for $10 to pick up everyone who didn't want it enough to pay the hardcover costs.</p><p>Now, this doesn't mesh very well with the electronic music or video markets which is why Amazon tries to run with a fixed price point. But that's a nuts way of doing things when you are talking about books. Doesn't work because it doesn't pay off the fixed costs involved in paying the people who produce the books.</p><p>So, really, a fair e-book price is about $5 less than whatever it is selling for on the shelf. When a book first comes out that means $30-$40. A year or so later $6 is pretty likely. If you can't stand waiting don't bitch about the higher price.</p><p>For a real understanding, check out this post from John Scalzi (author) that is really fantastic<br><a href="http://whatever.scalzi.com/2010/01/30/a-quick-note-on-ebook-pricing/" title="scalzi.com">http://whatever.scalzi.com/2010/01/30/a-quick-note-on-ebook-pricing/</a> [scalzi.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a preemptive reply to the ten million people who are about to post variations on the following theme " e-books should only cost a few dollars because they do n't have the cost of printing/shipping/storing a book " This is wrong.This is wrong because actually printing a book is the smallest cost involved in making one .
When you look at the price of , say , a $ 35 hardcover book perhaps $ 4 is physical costs .
Almost all of the cost of a book is the cost of paying the author/editor/proofreader plus the retail markup .
These costs remain the same regardless of format.And you will note that I have not mentioned publisher 's profit .
That 's because there basically is n't one .
Publishing is notorious for having no profit margin .
Always has been .
It was famous for not making money a century ago , famous for it fifty years ago and still a great way to get well known while losing money today .
Publishing is not the music industry and it is not the movie industry .
Almost all the profit is spent in up-front costs before the product even hits the streets.Because of this , publishing has always had a very sane pricing policy .
First they publish the hardcover for a high price point .
Everyone who ca n't wait to read it buys it .
Then if it is popular enough to pay off the costs six months or a year later they produce a softcover for $ 10 to pick up everyone who did n't want it enough to pay the hardcover costs.Now , this does n't mesh very well with the electronic music or video markets which is why Amazon tries to run with a fixed price point .
But that 's a nuts way of doing things when you are talking about books .
Does n't work because it does n't pay off the fixed costs involved in paying the people who produce the books.So , really , a fair e-book price is about $ 5 less than whatever it is selling for on the shelf .
When a book first comes out that means $ 30- $ 40 .
A year or so later $ 6 is pretty likely .
If you ca n't stand waiting do n't bitch about the higher price.For a real understanding , check out this post from John Scalzi ( author ) that is really fantastichttp : //whatever.scalzi.com/2010/01/30/a-quick-note-on-ebook-pricing/ [ scalzi.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a preemptive reply to the ten million people who are about to post variations on the following theme"e-books should only cost a few dollars because they don't have the cost of printing/shipping/storing a book"This is wrong.This is wrong because actually printing a book is the smallest cost involved in making one.
When you look at the price of, say, a $35 hardcover book perhaps $4 is physical costs.
Almost all of the cost of a book is the cost of paying the author/editor/proofreader plus the retail markup.
These costs remain the same regardless of format.And you will note that I have not mentioned publisher's profit.
That's because there basically isn't one.
Publishing is notorious for having no profit margin.
Always has been.
It was famous for not making money a century ago, famous for it fifty years ago and still a great way to get well known while losing money today.
Publishing is not the music industry and it is not the movie industry.
Almost all the profit is spent in up-front costs before the product even hits the streets.Because of this, publishing has always had a very sane pricing policy.
First they publish the hardcover for a high price point.
Everyone who can't wait to read it buys it.
Then if it is popular enough to pay off the costs six months or a year later they produce a softcover for $10 to pick up everyone who didn't want it enough to pay the hardcover costs.Now, this doesn't mesh very well with the electronic music or video markets which is why Amazon tries to run with a fixed price point.
But that's a nuts way of doing things when you are talking about books.
Doesn't work because it doesn't pay off the fixed costs involved in paying the people who produce the books.So, really, a fair e-book price is about $5 less than whatever it is selling for on the shelf.
When a book first comes out that means $30-$40.
A year or so later $6 is pretty likely.
If you can't stand waiting don't bitch about the higher price.For a real understanding, check out this post from John Scalzi (author) that is really fantastichttp://whatever.scalzi.com/2010/01/30/a-quick-note-on-ebook-pricing/ [scalzi.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034766</id>
	<title>Re:This just in...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265387220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Absolutely. Books are here to stay.</p><p>His real problem is a different one. With ebooks, many of the people living in the ecosystem BETWEEN the author and the reader are superfluous with ebooks.</p><p>If I like Neil Gaiman, and I read his blog. And he makes a new book, which is a pdf.</p><p>What do the two of us need anyone else for ? I can send him some cash, he can send me the book, end of story.</p><p>That's not an ending that Mr. Murdoch likes though, because it makes him irrelevant.</p></div><p>Clearly, you've never heard of marketing.  What about the cover design?  What about the book layout?  What about the editing?  What about the transaction system to sell the actual e-books?  No other entity besides a publisher has the expert tools to do all of this so the author can do what s/he does best: write good books.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely .
Books are here to stay.His real problem is a different one .
With ebooks , many of the people living in the ecosystem BETWEEN the author and the reader are superfluous with ebooks.If I like Neil Gaiman , and I read his blog .
And he makes a new book , which is a pdf.What do the two of us need anyone else for ?
I can send him some cash , he can send me the book , end of story.That 's not an ending that Mr. Murdoch likes though , because it makes him irrelevant.Clearly , you 've never heard of marketing .
What about the cover design ?
What about the book layout ?
What about the editing ?
What about the transaction system to sell the actual e-books ?
No other entity besides a publisher has the expert tools to do all of this so the author can do what s/he does best : write good books .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely.
Books are here to stay.His real problem is a different one.
With ebooks, many of the people living in the ecosystem BETWEEN the author and the reader are superfluous with ebooks.If I like Neil Gaiman, and I read his blog.
And he makes a new book, which is a pdf.What do the two of us need anyone else for ?
I can send him some cash, he can send me the book, end of story.That's not an ending that Mr. Murdoch likes though, because it makes him irrelevant.Clearly, you've never heard of marketing.
What about the cover design?
What about the book layout?
What about the editing?
What about the transaction system to sell the actual e-books?
No other entity besides a publisher has the expert tools to do all of this so the author can do what s/he does best: write good books.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031162</id>
	<title>In other news...</title>
	<author>Rammed Earth</author>
	<datestamp>1265305560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>According to sources, horse drawn carriage makers are complaining. "'"We don't like the Ford Model T selling at $850.00," they said. "But we think it really devalues transportation, and it hurts all the retailers of the horses and carriages.'"


'"We don't like the Edison model of selling electric lights," Captain Ahab said.  "I think it really devalues home lighting, and it hurts all the hunters of whales."</htmltext>
<tokenext>According to sources , horse drawn carriage makers are complaining .
" ' " We do n't like the Ford Model T selling at $ 850.00 , " they said .
" But we think it really devalues transportation , and it hurts all the retailers of the horses and carriages .
' " ' " We do n't like the Edison model of selling electric lights , " Captain Ahab said .
" I think it really devalues home lighting , and it hurts all the hunters of whales .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to sources, horse drawn carriage makers are complaining.
"'"We don't like the Ford Model T selling at $850.00," they said.
"But we think it really devalues transportation, and it hurts all the retailers of the horses and carriages.
'"


'"We don't like the Edison model of selling electric lights," Captain Ahab said.
"I think it really devalues home lighting, and it hurts all the hunters of whales.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031528</id>
	<title>Re:Just let Ebooks die already</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1265308260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I like technology. I really do, but the whole ebooks thing is bad. Just use pdfs that are not drmed.</p></div><p>So, ebooks are bad, but we should use PDFs (which are a form of ebook). DOES NOT COMPUTE!!! ERROR!! ERROR!!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like technology .
I really do , but the whole ebooks thing is bad .
Just use pdfs that are not drmed.So , ebooks are bad , but we should use PDFs ( which are a form of ebook ) .
DOES NOT COMPUTE ! ! !
ERROR ! ! ERROR !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like technology.
I really do, but the whole ebooks thing is bad.
Just use pdfs that are not drmed.So, ebooks are bad, but we should use PDFs (which are a form of ebook).
DOES NOT COMPUTE!!!
ERROR!! ERROR!
!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031598</id>
	<title>Re:Prices</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265308740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's funny.  Sometimes it's "Printing and related costs" are a big portion of the cost structure, and other times they're a small portion.  I guess it depends on whatever market and technology forces are threatening their unnatural monopoly!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's funny .
Sometimes it 's " Printing and related costs " are a big portion of the cost structure , and other times they 're a small portion .
I guess it depends on whatever market and technology forces are threatening their unnatural monopoly !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's funny.
Sometimes it's "Printing and related costs" are a big portion of the cost structure, and other times they're a small portion.
I guess it depends on whatever market and technology forces are threatening their unnatural monopoly!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035994</id>
	<title>Re:9.99 isn't CHEAP for an ebook you don't own</title>
	<author>ThousandStars</author>
	<datestamp>1265392800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>What they're hoping is that you won't be bothered to go to the used bookstore to get that book. Or even when it is convenient (like Amazon Marketplace), you are too impatient to wait. So far, the sales figures seem to bear this out. Convenience wins. </i>

<p>I wonder how many people actually reread any particular book that they buy. If the answer is "never" or "almost never," then the convenience of eBooks more than makes up for buying them -- since you're only likely to read it once anyway.

</p><p>Granted, <i>you</i>, the parent commenter, might read many of your books more than once, but if most people don't, the issue is not great for them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What they 're hoping is that you wo n't be bothered to go to the used bookstore to get that book .
Or even when it is convenient ( like Amazon Marketplace ) , you are too impatient to wait .
So far , the sales figures seem to bear this out .
Convenience wins .
I wonder how many people actually reread any particular book that they buy .
If the answer is " never " or " almost never , " then the convenience of eBooks more than makes up for buying them -- since you 're only likely to read it once anyway .
Granted , you , the parent commenter , might read many of your books more than once , but if most people do n't , the issue is not great for them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What they're hoping is that you won't be bothered to go to the used bookstore to get that book.
Or even when it is convenient (like Amazon Marketplace), you are too impatient to wait.
So far, the sales figures seem to bear this out.
Convenience wins.
I wonder how many people actually reread any particular book that they buy.
If the answer is "never" or "almost never," then the convenience of eBooks more than makes up for buying them -- since you're only likely to read it once anyway.
Granted, you, the parent commenter, might read many of your books more than once, but if most people don't, the issue is not great for them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031280</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032120</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265401560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Paperback: $7.00<br># times you can loan: personal best, oh, about 10<br># years you can own: personal best, 34<br>Resale value: personal best, $27.00</p></div></blockquote><p>In my experience, cheaply-printed hardcovers will last for about 50 years of moderate use.  Better ones will last far longer--I've got quite a few 80+ year old books in my collection, and most of them look pretty damn good.  My oldest is ~160 years, I think (I don't really <i>try</i> to get older books, but that one was a curiosity and, as it turns out, hasn't been printed since.  I really ought to submit that thing to Project Gutenberg...)  Paperbacks will last 5-50 years, I'd say, depending on the quality and assuming they're being read from time to time and not just sitting on a shelf.  Mass markets paperbacks can't really take more than a half-dozen readings, unless they're very thin or you're <i>really</i> careful with them.</p><blockquote><div><p>Hardcovers? Who buys hardcovers?</p></div></blockquote><p>I do.  I like the larger print, and for classics it's often worth it for extras you (sometimes) don't get in the cheap paperbacks.  I never buy them new, though, unless they're on the bargain rack for $4 or so.  Generally pay about 1/2 to 2/3 the price of a new paper back for them, used or on sale.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Paperback : $ 7.00 # times you can loan : personal best , oh , about 10 # years you can own : personal best , 34Resale value : personal best , $ 27.00In my experience , cheaply-printed hardcovers will last for about 50 years of moderate use .
Better ones will last far longer--I 've got quite a few 80 + year old books in my collection , and most of them look pretty damn good .
My oldest is ~ 160 years , I think ( I do n't really try to get older books , but that one was a curiosity and , as it turns out , has n't been printed since .
I really ought to submit that thing to Project Gutenberg... ) Paperbacks will last 5-50 years , I 'd say , depending on the quality and assuming they 're being read from time to time and not just sitting on a shelf .
Mass markets paperbacks ca n't really take more than a half-dozen readings , unless they 're very thin or you 're really careful with them.Hardcovers ?
Who buys hardcovers ? I do .
I like the larger print , and for classics it 's often worth it for extras you ( sometimes ) do n't get in the cheap paperbacks .
I never buy them new , though , unless they 're on the bargain rack for $ 4 or so .
Generally pay about 1/2 to 2/3 the price of a new paper back for them , used or on sale .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paperback: $7.00# times you can loan: personal best, oh, about 10# years you can own: personal best, 34Resale value: personal best, $27.00In my experience, cheaply-printed hardcovers will last for about 50 years of moderate use.
Better ones will last far longer--I've got quite a few 80+ year old books in my collection, and most of them look pretty damn good.
My oldest is ~160 years, I think (I don't really try to get older books, but that one was a curiosity and, as it turns out, hasn't been printed since.
I really ought to submit that thing to Project Gutenberg...)  Paperbacks will last 5-50 years, I'd say, depending on the quality and assuming they're being read from time to time and not just sitting on a shelf.
Mass markets paperbacks can't really take more than a half-dozen readings, unless they're very thin or you're really careful with them.Hardcovers?
Who buys hardcovers?I do.
I like the larger print, and for classics it's often worth it for extras you (sometimes) don't get in the cheap paperbacks.
I never buy them new, though, unless they're on the bargain rack for $4 or so.
Generally pay about 1/2 to 2/3 the price of a new paper back for them, used or on sale.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031090</id>
	<title>Change doesn't always destroy</title>
	<author>logback</author>
	<datestamp>1265304960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even though ebooks are definitely the future I think people will always buy hardback and paperback books because there's nothing like actually having it in your hands, unless of course we cut down all the trees.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even though ebooks are definitely the future I think people will always buy hardback and paperback books because there 's nothing like actually having it in your hands , unless of course we cut down all the trees .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even though ebooks are definitely the future I think people will always buy hardback and paperback books because there's nothing like actually having it in your hands, unless of course we cut down all the trees.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033454</id>
	<title>Re:Prices</title>
	<author>(arg!)Styopa</author>
	<datestamp>1265377560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"....blah blah blah about why ebooks should be almost as expensive as real ones..."</p><p>Bullshit.</p><p>Double Bullshit, in fact.</p><p>See, the point you're overlooking is that the costs you mention are FLAT.<br>What the author is paid for his intellectual and (very hard) work is a flat amount.  Note, I of course recognize that this isn't true in the real world, most authors are paid a floating number - this make sense, as they are 'sharing' the profit over time, mainly so that the publishers can pay them less to start.  They're wagering the book will be unsuccessful, in a sense.  This is the publisher's choice, unless you are a supremely successful artist.  But on the face of it, the author does a finite amount of work, and in a normal situation, would be paid a finite amount.</p><p>Marketing, editing, all that stuff - could all be accounted as one-time costs.<br>But in a real, paper book, every book takes setup time, printing time, and raw materials to make.  So for every book, there is an incremental increase in cost.</p><p>Not so with ebooks.  You can pay the finite costs, and (aside from server time) it costs you no more to 'sell' a billion copies.</p><p>So arithmatically, the idea that ebooks should somehow be tied to this concept of infinite lucrative return despite fixed costs is truly, truly bullshit.</p><p>It's what makes the music/book/software world absolutely nonsensical to the rest of us who merely get paid for the work we do, and don't expect eternal compensation for something we did last year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ....blah blah blah about why ebooks should be almost as expensive as real ones... " Bullshit.Double Bullshit , in fact.See , the point you 're overlooking is that the costs you mention are FLAT.What the author is paid for his intellectual and ( very hard ) work is a flat amount .
Note , I of course recognize that this is n't true in the real world , most authors are paid a floating number - this make sense , as they are 'sharing ' the profit over time , mainly so that the publishers can pay them less to start .
They 're wagering the book will be unsuccessful , in a sense .
This is the publisher 's choice , unless you are a supremely successful artist .
But on the face of it , the author does a finite amount of work , and in a normal situation , would be paid a finite amount.Marketing , editing , all that stuff - could all be accounted as one-time costs.But in a real , paper book , every book takes setup time , printing time , and raw materials to make .
So for every book , there is an incremental increase in cost.Not so with ebooks .
You can pay the finite costs , and ( aside from server time ) it costs you no more to 'sell ' a billion copies.So arithmatically , the idea that ebooks should somehow be tied to this concept of infinite lucrative return despite fixed costs is truly , truly bullshit.It 's what makes the music/book/software world absolutely nonsensical to the rest of us who merely get paid for the work we do , and do n't expect eternal compensation for something we did last year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"....blah blah blah about why ebooks should be almost as expensive as real ones..."Bullshit.Double Bullshit, in fact.See, the point you're overlooking is that the costs you mention are FLAT.What the author is paid for his intellectual and (very hard) work is a flat amount.
Note, I of course recognize that this isn't true in the real world, most authors are paid a floating number - this make sense, as they are 'sharing' the profit over time, mainly so that the publishers can pay them less to start.
They're wagering the book will be unsuccessful, in a sense.
This is the publisher's choice, unless you are a supremely successful artist.
But on the face of it, the author does a finite amount of work, and in a normal situation, would be paid a finite amount.Marketing, editing, all that stuff - could all be accounted as one-time costs.But in a real, paper book, every book takes setup time, printing time, and raw materials to make.
So for every book, there is an incremental increase in cost.Not so with ebooks.
You can pay the finite costs, and (aside from server time) it costs you no more to 'sell' a billion copies.So arithmatically, the idea that ebooks should somehow be tied to this concept of infinite lucrative return despite fixed costs is truly, truly bullshit.It's what makes the music/book/software world absolutely nonsensical to the rest of us who merely get paid for the work we do, and don't expect eternal compensation for something we did last year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033534</id>
	<title>A perspective on e-books</title>
	<author>jimfrost</author>
	<datestamp>1265378520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In reading the commentary for this post I see that there are a lot of common misconceptions about e-books, and particularly e-book durability, that continue to be perpetuated.  I thought I would inject some real-world, long-term experience on the subject as well as on the progression and viability of the market.</p><p>I bought my first e-book in 1998, to read on my Palm 5000, from a little retailer/publisher called Peanut Press.  This book was called "Sister, Sister".</p><p>Luddites would suggest that I would have long ago lost access to this book.  After all, since that time I have switched to a Palm V, then a pair of Handsprings, then a Sony Cleo, then a Palm T|X, then an iPod touch, and today use an iPhone and a Kindle.  I lost or destroyed the Palm V, one of the Handsprings, and a Kindle along the line.  As it turns out I can still read that book on all of my current e-book capable devices today.</p><p>In short, the reading device is ephemeral; possession of the book is orthogonal to the possession of the device.  Most e-book critics either do not know this, do not understand it, or deliberately ignore it  but it is the case.</p><p>To elaborate: Back when I bought my first e-book the Palm could hold about four books in its memory, but my PC could hold a large personal library's worth -- thousands.  I could burn a CD with a collection of perhaps 500 books at a shot.  Today an extensive personal library will fit on a $5 thumb drive you can buy at the grocery store.  As such, having back-ups of your books is both easy and very very cheap.  Moreover, unlike the digital music industry, retailers allow you to re-download books you have purchased -- giving you offsite backups in the normal course of things, and protecting your library even from disasters such as floods or fire that would destroy a paper library utterly.  Rather than being at a disadvantage e-books, in the best cases, are much more durable due to the ease of copying.</p><p>E-books do have a new kind of loss, that of loss of access to the content because the e-book's file format becomes unreadable in one way or another.  This will usually happen because the format becomes obsolete or because the format is protected with DRM such that you don't have access to it if, say, you switch devices.  This is a real risk, but it's worthwhile to see how this risk has played out over the long term.  I've seen it play out several times over at this point.</p><p>Early on there were a whole bunch of different e-book formats, and some dedicated devices, and if you picked the wrong one you could be completely out of luck when the industry moved on to something else.  I have lost one book entirely as a result of purchasing it in Adobe e-book format, the only format the publisher allowed it to be sold in.  This was a horrific format in terms of how restrictive its DRM was, how poor Adobe's reader software was, and in terms of Adobe's ongoing support.  Their reader was almost unusable and wrecked formatting, even to the point of breaking in the middle of words at the end of a "page", even though the book loading process required you to spend many minutes waiting for it to be "formatted for your device."  After about a year Adobe modified the format in an incompatible way, and required conversion, and the conversion tools were extremely difficult to use.  On top of all of that the DRM format was so restrictive that losing the one device that was authorized to read the content caused total loss of the content.  Given the poor reading experience it was unsurprising that this format died quickly (and, frankly, Adobe should be ashamed of themselves to have done such a bad job of it).</p><p>That represents the worst experience for an e-book.  But that is in no way the norm, not then and certainly not today.</p><p>Most of today's formats, even the Kindle format (which is, after all, just a minor modification of Mobipocket), allow both DRM restricted and open encoding.  There are really only two surviving formats: ePub and Mobipocket, and both are supported on a huge range of devices</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In reading the commentary for this post I see that there are a lot of common misconceptions about e-books , and particularly e-book durability , that continue to be perpetuated .
I thought I would inject some real-world , long-term experience on the subject as well as on the progression and viability of the market.I bought my first e-book in 1998 , to read on my Palm 5000 , from a little retailer/publisher called Peanut Press .
This book was called " Sister , Sister " .Luddites would suggest that I would have long ago lost access to this book .
After all , since that time I have switched to a Palm V , then a pair of Handsprings , then a Sony Cleo , then a Palm T | X , then an iPod touch , and today use an iPhone and a Kindle .
I lost or destroyed the Palm V , one of the Handsprings , and a Kindle along the line .
As it turns out I can still read that book on all of my current e-book capable devices today.In short , the reading device is ephemeral ; possession of the book is orthogonal to the possession of the device .
Most e-book critics either do not know this , do not understand it , or deliberately ignore it but it is the case.To elaborate : Back when I bought my first e-book the Palm could hold about four books in its memory , but my PC could hold a large personal library 's worth -- thousands .
I could burn a CD with a collection of perhaps 500 books at a shot .
Today an extensive personal library will fit on a $ 5 thumb drive you can buy at the grocery store .
As such , having back-ups of your books is both easy and very very cheap .
Moreover , unlike the digital music industry , retailers allow you to re-download books you have purchased -- giving you offsite backups in the normal course of things , and protecting your library even from disasters such as floods or fire that would destroy a paper library utterly .
Rather than being at a disadvantage e-books , in the best cases , are much more durable due to the ease of copying.E-books do have a new kind of loss , that of loss of access to the content because the e-book 's file format becomes unreadable in one way or another .
This will usually happen because the format becomes obsolete or because the format is protected with DRM such that you do n't have access to it if , say , you switch devices .
This is a real risk , but it 's worthwhile to see how this risk has played out over the long term .
I 've seen it play out several times over at this point.Early on there were a whole bunch of different e-book formats , and some dedicated devices , and if you picked the wrong one you could be completely out of luck when the industry moved on to something else .
I have lost one book entirely as a result of purchasing it in Adobe e-book format , the only format the publisher allowed it to be sold in .
This was a horrific format in terms of how restrictive its DRM was , how poor Adobe 's reader software was , and in terms of Adobe 's ongoing support .
Their reader was almost unusable and wrecked formatting , even to the point of breaking in the middle of words at the end of a " page " , even though the book loading process required you to spend many minutes waiting for it to be " formatted for your device .
" After about a year Adobe modified the format in an incompatible way , and required conversion , and the conversion tools were extremely difficult to use .
On top of all of that the DRM format was so restrictive that losing the one device that was authorized to read the content caused total loss of the content .
Given the poor reading experience it was unsurprising that this format died quickly ( and , frankly , Adobe should be ashamed of themselves to have done such a bad job of it ) .That represents the worst experience for an e-book .
But that is in no way the norm , not then and certainly not today.Most of today 's formats , even the Kindle format ( which is , after all , just a minor modification of Mobipocket ) , allow both DRM restricted and open encoding .
There are really only two surviving formats : ePub and Mobipocket , and both are supported on a huge range of devices</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In reading the commentary for this post I see that there are a lot of common misconceptions about e-books, and particularly e-book durability, that continue to be perpetuated.
I thought I would inject some real-world, long-term experience on the subject as well as on the progression and viability of the market.I bought my first e-book in 1998, to read on my Palm 5000, from a little retailer/publisher called Peanut Press.
This book was called "Sister, Sister".Luddites would suggest that I would have long ago lost access to this book.
After all, since that time I have switched to a Palm V, then a pair of Handsprings, then a Sony Cleo, then a Palm T|X, then an iPod touch, and today use an iPhone and a Kindle.
I lost or destroyed the Palm V, one of the Handsprings, and a Kindle along the line.
As it turns out I can still read that book on all of my current e-book capable devices today.In short, the reading device is ephemeral; possession of the book is orthogonal to the possession of the device.
Most e-book critics either do not know this, do not understand it, or deliberately ignore it  but it is the case.To elaborate: Back when I bought my first e-book the Palm could hold about four books in its memory, but my PC could hold a large personal library's worth -- thousands.
I could burn a CD with a collection of perhaps 500 books at a shot.
Today an extensive personal library will fit on a $5 thumb drive you can buy at the grocery store.
As such, having back-ups of your books is both easy and very very cheap.
Moreover, unlike the digital music industry, retailers allow you to re-download books you have purchased -- giving you offsite backups in the normal course of things, and protecting your library even from disasters such as floods or fire that would destroy a paper library utterly.
Rather than being at a disadvantage e-books, in the best cases, are much more durable due to the ease of copying.E-books do have a new kind of loss, that of loss of access to the content because the e-book's file format becomes unreadable in one way or another.
This will usually happen because the format becomes obsolete or because the format is protected with DRM such that you don't have access to it if, say, you switch devices.
This is a real risk, but it's worthwhile to see how this risk has played out over the long term.
I've seen it play out several times over at this point.Early on there were a whole bunch of different e-book formats, and some dedicated devices, and if you picked the wrong one you could be completely out of luck when the industry moved on to something else.
I have lost one book entirely as a result of purchasing it in Adobe e-book format, the only format the publisher allowed it to be sold in.
This was a horrific format in terms of how restrictive its DRM was, how poor Adobe's reader software was, and in terms of Adobe's ongoing support.
Their reader was almost unusable and wrecked formatting, even to the point of breaking in the middle of words at the end of a "page", even though the book loading process required you to spend many minutes waiting for it to be "formatted for your device.
"  After about a year Adobe modified the format in an incompatible way, and required conversion, and the conversion tools were extremely difficult to use.
On top of all of that the DRM format was so restrictive that losing the one device that was authorized to read the content caused total loss of the content.
Given the poor reading experience it was unsurprising that this format died quickly (and, frankly, Adobe should be ashamed of themselves to have done such a bad job of it).That represents the worst experience for an e-book.
But that is in no way the norm, not then and certainly not today.Most of today's formats, even the Kindle format (which is, after all, just a minor modification of Mobipocket), allow both DRM restricted and open encoding.
There are really only two surviving formats: ePub and Mobipocket, and both are supported on a huge range of devices</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031866</id>
	<title>Re:One other thing</title>
	<author>ultramk</author>
	<datestamp>1265311680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. But she doesn't, so she's not. Similarly, hemp will never be grown in this country until pot is deregulated, because it's visually identical to industrial hemp and would make enforcing pot farm sweeps impossible.</p><p>And you know this. Everybody knows this. It's the only reason the patchouli set are so enamored of hemp products, out of a quaint belief that it'll serve as an end run around the war on drugs. Sorry, not gonna happen. Get over it, or work on deregulating pot directly. Don't waste our time with the 'miracles' of hemp.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and if my aunt had balls she 'd be my uncle .
But she does n't , so she 's not .
Similarly , hemp will never be grown in this country until pot is deregulated , because it 's visually identical to industrial hemp and would make enforcing pot farm sweeps impossible.And you know this .
Everybody knows this .
It 's the only reason the patchouli set are so enamored of hemp products , out of a quaint belief that it 'll serve as an end run around the war on drugs .
Sorry , not gon na happen .
Get over it , or work on deregulating pot directly .
Do n't waste our time with the 'miracles ' of hemp .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.
But she doesn't, so she's not.
Similarly, hemp will never be grown in this country until pot is deregulated, because it's visually identical to industrial hemp and would make enforcing pot farm sweeps impossible.And you know this.
Everybody knows this.
It's the only reason the patchouli set are so enamored of hemp products, out of a quaint belief that it'll serve as an end run around the war on drugs.
Sorry, not gonna happen.
Get over it, or work on deregulating pot directly.
Don't waste our time with the 'miracles' of hemp.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31040678</id>
	<title>MacMillan wants ebooks to wither on the vine</title>
	<author>bgalbrecht</author>
	<datestamp>1265370480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The paperback edition will eventually cost less than the 9.99 to 14.99 that Macmillan wants to charge.</p></div><p>While it is true that MacMillan claims that their model will have dynamic pricing that will drop the price from the $15 starting price eventually down to $6, I don't believe it. If you look at MacMillan ebooks, you'll find most of them are still priced at hardback prices even years after the mass market paperback has been released. For example, consider the backlist Kinsey Millhone mysteries by MacMillan author Sue Grafton (i.e., all but the most recent one that's not yet been released in MMPB).  I compared the prices at MacMillan, Barnes &amp; Noble, Sony, Fictionwise, and Books on Board.  MacMillan is charging $7.99 for all of the MMPBs, and $14 for all of the ebooks.  The other ebook stores are probably the top selling ebook stores after Amazon.  There are probably 50 titles between these 4 stores, and about a dozen are at or below the MMPB price, about a dozen are selling for over $20, and the rest are selling for between $10 and $17. Randomly looking at other fiction at MacMillan's website, if they sell an ebook edition, unless it's only been published as a MMPB, the ebook is almost always priced higher than a MMPB.</p><p>Second, despite SF and Fantasy readers tending to be early adopters of tech devices like ebook readers, very few of MacMillan's SF/F imprint Tor/Forge are released as ebooks.  About 3 years ago, Tor did some experiments with Webscriptions (primarily associated, but not exclusively, with Baen), but Tor's parent company shut it down.  In addition, MacMillan's CEO refuses to sell ebooks to libraries <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/21/technology/in-lean-times-e-books-find-a-friend-libraries.html" title="nytimes.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/21/technology/in-lean-times-e-books-find-a-friend-libraries.html</a> [nytimes.com]. </p><p>I don't doubt that ebook pricing is somewhat broken, and Amazon is part of the problem.  Whether MacMillan likes it or not, the average ebook consumer does not value the ebook to be worth the same price as a hardback, and probably not even as much as a MMPB.  You can't sell it, you can't get it signed by the author, you can't loan it, etc. When a best seller is getting heavily discounted by online and bricks and mortar retailers alike, it's unreasonable for MacMillan to expect that the ebook consumer should have to pay two to three times the hardback price, but that's exactly what they are trying to achieve by moving to the agency model where the retailer is unable to set its own price. And if MacMillan continues to overprice ebooks as they are presently doing, ebook consumers will stop buying. </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The paperback edition will eventually cost less than the 9.99 to 14.99 that Macmillan wants to charge.While it is true that MacMillan claims that their model will have dynamic pricing that will drop the price from the $ 15 starting price eventually down to $ 6 , I do n't believe it .
If you look at MacMillan ebooks , you 'll find most of them are still priced at hardback prices even years after the mass market paperback has been released .
For example , consider the backlist Kinsey Millhone mysteries by MacMillan author Sue Grafton ( i.e. , all but the most recent one that 's not yet been released in MMPB ) .
I compared the prices at MacMillan , Barnes &amp; Noble , Sony , Fictionwise , and Books on Board .
MacMillan is charging $ 7.99 for all of the MMPBs , and $ 14 for all of the ebooks .
The other ebook stores are probably the top selling ebook stores after Amazon .
There are probably 50 titles between these 4 stores , and about a dozen are at or below the MMPB price , about a dozen are selling for over $ 20 , and the rest are selling for between $ 10 and $ 17 .
Randomly looking at other fiction at MacMillan 's website , if they sell an ebook edition , unless it 's only been published as a MMPB , the ebook is almost always priced higher than a MMPB.Second , despite SF and Fantasy readers tending to be early adopters of tech devices like ebook readers , very few of MacMillan 's SF/F imprint Tor/Forge are released as ebooks .
About 3 years ago , Tor did some experiments with Webscriptions ( primarily associated , but not exclusively , with Baen ) , but Tor 's parent company shut it down .
In addition , MacMillan 's CEO refuses to sell ebooks to libraries http : //www.nytimes.com/2002/02/21/technology/in-lean-times-e-books-find-a-friend-libraries.html [ nytimes.com ] .
I do n't doubt that ebook pricing is somewhat broken , and Amazon is part of the problem .
Whether MacMillan likes it or not , the average ebook consumer does not value the ebook to be worth the same price as a hardback , and probably not even as much as a MMPB .
You ca n't sell it , you ca n't get it signed by the author , you ca n't loan it , etc .
When a best seller is getting heavily discounted by online and bricks and mortar retailers alike , it 's unreasonable for MacMillan to expect that the ebook consumer should have to pay two to three times the hardback price , but that 's exactly what they are trying to achieve by moving to the agency model where the retailer is unable to set its own price .
And if MacMillan continues to overprice ebooks as they are presently doing , ebook consumers will stop buying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The paperback edition will eventually cost less than the 9.99 to 14.99 that Macmillan wants to charge.While it is true that MacMillan claims that their model will have dynamic pricing that will drop the price from the $15 starting price eventually down to $6, I don't believe it.
If you look at MacMillan ebooks, you'll find most of them are still priced at hardback prices even years after the mass market paperback has been released.
For example, consider the backlist Kinsey Millhone mysteries by MacMillan author Sue Grafton (i.e., all but the most recent one that's not yet been released in MMPB).
I compared the prices at MacMillan, Barnes &amp; Noble, Sony, Fictionwise, and Books on Board.
MacMillan is charging $7.99 for all of the MMPBs, and $14 for all of the ebooks.
The other ebook stores are probably the top selling ebook stores after Amazon.
There are probably 50 titles between these 4 stores, and about a dozen are at or below the MMPB price, about a dozen are selling for over $20, and the rest are selling for between $10 and $17.
Randomly looking at other fiction at MacMillan's website, if they sell an ebook edition, unless it's only been published as a MMPB, the ebook is almost always priced higher than a MMPB.Second, despite SF and Fantasy readers tending to be early adopters of tech devices like ebook readers, very few of MacMillan's SF/F imprint Tor/Forge are released as ebooks.
About 3 years ago, Tor did some experiments with Webscriptions (primarily associated, but not exclusively, with Baen), but Tor's parent company shut it down.
In addition, MacMillan's CEO refuses to sell ebooks to libraries http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/21/technology/in-lean-times-e-books-find-a-friend-libraries.html [nytimes.com].
I don't doubt that ebook pricing is somewhat broken, and Amazon is part of the problem.
Whether MacMillan likes it or not, the average ebook consumer does not value the ebook to be worth the same price as a hardback, and probably not even as much as a MMPB.
You can't sell it, you can't get it signed by the author, you can't loan it, etc.
When a best seller is getting heavily discounted by online and bricks and mortar retailers alike, it's unreasonable for MacMillan to expect that the ebook consumer should have to pay two to three times the hardback price, but that's exactly what they are trying to achieve by moving to the agency model where the retailer is unable to set its own price.
And if MacMillan continues to overprice ebooks as they are presently doing, ebook consumers will stop buying. 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031336</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032062</id>
	<title>Re:"Murdoch Wants"</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1265400540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Well hell, there's reason enough for me to oppose whatever else is in the paragraph below, never mind TFA.</p></div><p>Even more, it's reason enough for me to support whatever he's opposing.</p><p><i>"But I think it really devalues books, and it hurts all the retailers of the hardcover books.'"</i></p><p>In other words, it hurts <em>you</em>, Mr Murdoch. Which is exceedingly great news - and entirely legal to boot! Where do I sign up for more of that fun?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well hell , there 's reason enough for me to oppose whatever else is in the paragraph below , never mind TFA.Even more , it 's reason enough for me to support whatever he 's opposing .
" But I think it really devalues books , and it hurts all the retailers of the hardcover books .
' " In other words , it hurts you , Mr Murdoch .
Which is exceedingly great news - and entirely legal to boot !
Where do I sign up for more of that fun ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well hell, there's reason enough for me to oppose whatever else is in the paragraph below, never mind TFA.Even more, it's reason enough for me to support whatever he's opposing.
"But I think it really devalues books, and it hurts all the retailers of the hardcover books.
'"In other words, it hurts you, Mr Murdoch.
Which is exceedingly great news - and entirely legal to boot!
Where do I sign up for more of that fun?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030784</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031352</id>
	<title>Re:Prices</title>
	<author>grcumb</author>
	<datestamp>1265306820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>This is wrong because actually printing a book is the smallest cost involved in making one. When you look at the price of, say, a $35 hardcover book perhaps $4 is physical costs. Almost all of the cost of a book is the cost of paying the author/editor/proofreader plus the retail markup. These costs remain the same regardless of format.</p></div></blockquote><p>Er, no. Well, not entirely.</p><p>Editorial costs are huge, certainly, and layout is a costly endeavour. Assuming, however, that these costs were going to be incurred <em>anyway</em>, the marginal cost of selling e-books <em>in conjunction with print</em> is extremely low.</p><p>Retail mark-up is almost certainly reduced because of the lower overheads and higher (potential) customer base involved in online selling.</p><p>The real problem is that the two formats compete with one another. Many readers will opt for a cheaper e-book if the price difference between electronic and print format is significant enough. Ignoring for a moment the potentially increased readership, it's quite possible that the result could be significantly reduced profits.</p><blockquote><div><p>Publishing is notorious for having no profit margin. Always has been. It was famous for not making money a century ago, famous for it fifty years ago and still a great way to get well known while losing money today.</p></div></blockquote><p>It may have been famous for it 50 years ago, but it bears noting that some of the giants of US publishing established themselves in the 19th Century by brazenly ignoring UK copyright law and publishing best-sellers without compensation to the authors or the original publishers.</p><p>One might almost say there's an interesting lesson to be learned there...</p><p>Anyway, in spite of all this, I think your fundamental point is valid: Most people grossly underestimate the cost of publishing a book.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is wrong because actually printing a book is the smallest cost involved in making one .
When you look at the price of , say , a $ 35 hardcover book perhaps $ 4 is physical costs .
Almost all of the cost of a book is the cost of paying the author/editor/proofreader plus the retail markup .
These costs remain the same regardless of format.Er , no .
Well , not entirely.Editorial costs are huge , certainly , and layout is a costly endeavour .
Assuming , however , that these costs were going to be incurred anyway , the marginal cost of selling e-books in conjunction with print is extremely low.Retail mark-up is almost certainly reduced because of the lower overheads and higher ( potential ) customer base involved in online selling.The real problem is that the two formats compete with one another .
Many readers will opt for a cheaper e-book if the price difference between electronic and print format is significant enough .
Ignoring for a moment the potentially increased readership , it 's quite possible that the result could be significantly reduced profits.Publishing is notorious for having no profit margin .
Always has been .
It was famous for not making money a century ago , famous for it fifty years ago and still a great way to get well known while losing money today.It may have been famous for it 50 years ago , but it bears noting that some of the giants of US publishing established themselves in the 19th Century by brazenly ignoring UK copyright law and publishing best-sellers without compensation to the authors or the original publishers.One might almost say there 's an interesting lesson to be learned there...Anyway , in spite of all this , I think your fundamental point is valid : Most people grossly underestimate the cost of publishing a book .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is wrong because actually printing a book is the smallest cost involved in making one.
When you look at the price of, say, a $35 hardcover book perhaps $4 is physical costs.
Almost all of the cost of a book is the cost of paying the author/editor/proofreader plus the retail markup.
These costs remain the same regardless of format.Er, no.
Well, not entirely.Editorial costs are huge, certainly, and layout is a costly endeavour.
Assuming, however, that these costs were going to be incurred anyway, the marginal cost of selling e-books in conjunction with print is extremely low.Retail mark-up is almost certainly reduced because of the lower overheads and higher (potential) customer base involved in online selling.The real problem is that the two formats compete with one another.
Many readers will opt for a cheaper e-book if the price difference between electronic and print format is significant enough.
Ignoring for a moment the potentially increased readership, it's quite possible that the result could be significantly reduced profits.Publishing is notorious for having no profit margin.
Always has been.
It was famous for not making money a century ago, famous for it fifty years ago and still a great way to get well known while losing money today.It may have been famous for it 50 years ago, but it bears noting that some of the giants of US publishing established themselves in the 19th Century by brazenly ignoring UK copyright law and publishing best-sellers without compensation to the authors or the original publishers.One might almost say there's an interesting lesson to be learned there...Anyway, in spite of all this, I think your fundamental point is valid: Most people grossly underestimate the cost of publishing a book.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031998</id>
	<title>Re:Books vs. E-books</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265313300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>admittedly I have yet to use the Nook or other such devices</p></div><p>Try an e-Ink screen.  It's great.  You have to read a lot to make it worth your while to buy an e-Ink reader, but unless you're one of the few who can read LCD all day and all night without eyestrain, it's a real pleasure to use.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>admittedly I have yet to use the Nook or other such devicesTry an e-Ink screen .
It 's great .
You have to read a lot to make it worth your while to buy an e-Ink reader , but unless you 're one of the few who can read LCD all day and all night without eyestrain , it 's a real pleasure to use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>admittedly I have yet to use the Nook or other such devicesTry an e-Ink screen.
It's great.
You have to read a lot to make it worth your while to buy an e-Ink reader, but unless you're one of the few who can read LCD all day and all night without eyestrain, it's a real pleasure to use.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031984</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265313060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Hardcovers? Who buys hardcovers?</i> </p><p>I buy hardcovers almost exclusively.  A typical price is $10 or less (with shipping).  If the new hardcover is too much, I get a used one at the price I seek (typically under $10).  Since I will spend many hours with each one, the price is acceptable from an entertainment/dollar perspective.  It beats the hell out of movies (theater or DVD), eating out, bar drinks, one sports event ($100+ for 3 hours of "entertainment" and 6 hours of aggravation).  What I would NOT do is pay $7 for a paperback (unless no other format is available).  They look like shit after one reading.  For a few bucks more (and sometimes for less), I get a book that will last decades, is more comfortable to read, looks good on my shelves.  For a small fraction more, you get a better product.  They're both just pages between a cover.  But your cover sucks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hardcovers ?
Who buys hardcovers ?
I buy hardcovers almost exclusively .
A typical price is $ 10 or less ( with shipping ) .
If the new hardcover is too much , I get a used one at the price I seek ( typically under $ 10 ) .
Since I will spend many hours with each one , the price is acceptable from an entertainment/dollar perspective .
It beats the hell out of movies ( theater or DVD ) , eating out , bar drinks , one sports event ( $ 100 + for 3 hours of " entertainment " and 6 hours of aggravation ) .
What I would NOT do is pay $ 7 for a paperback ( unless no other format is available ) .
They look like shit after one reading .
For a few bucks more ( and sometimes for less ) , I get a book that will last decades , is more comfortable to read , looks good on my shelves .
For a small fraction more , you get a better product .
They 're both just pages between a cover .
But your cover sucks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hardcovers?
Who buys hardcovers?
I buy hardcovers almost exclusively.
A typical price is $10 or less (with shipping).
If the new hardcover is too much, I get a used one at the price I seek (typically under $10).
Since I will spend many hours with each one, the price is acceptable from an entertainment/dollar perspective.
It beats the hell out of movies (theater or DVD), eating out, bar drinks, one sports event ($100+ for 3 hours of "entertainment" and 6 hours of aggravation).
What I would NOT do is pay $7 for a paperback (unless no other format is available).
They look like shit after one reading.
For a few bucks more (and sometimes for less), I get a book that will last decades, is more comfortable to read, looks good on my shelves.
For a small fraction more, you get a better product.
They're both just pages between a cover.
But your cover sucks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031296</id>
	<title>Paper Books Won't Die</title>
	<author>bschorr</author>
	<datestamp>1265306460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They just might get marginalized a bit.  Lots of people still prefer paper, paper books still look better on the bookshelf or coffee table, lots of people would rather read a paper book at the beach or poolside.  There will always be a market for paper books - it just may shrink a bit as cost-conscious consumers sometimes choose the eBook option.<br><br>Frankly some of my friends who buy eBooks will ALSO buy the print edition of books they really like.  And some will get the free sample chapter on their Kindle then go out and buy the paper version if they like it.  Even better for publishers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They just might get marginalized a bit .
Lots of people still prefer paper , paper books still look better on the bookshelf or coffee table , lots of people would rather read a paper book at the beach or poolside .
There will always be a market for paper books - it just may shrink a bit as cost-conscious consumers sometimes choose the eBook option.Frankly some of my friends who buy eBooks will ALSO buy the print edition of books they really like .
And some will get the free sample chapter on their Kindle then go out and buy the paper version if they like it .
Even better for publishers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They just might get marginalized a bit.
Lots of people still prefer paper, paper books still look better on the bookshelf or coffee table, lots of people would rather read a paper book at the beach or poolside.
There will always be a market for paper books - it just may shrink a bit as cost-conscious consumers sometimes choose the eBook option.Frankly some of my friends who buy eBooks will ALSO buy the print edition of books they really like.
And some will get the free sample chapter on their Kindle then go out and buy the paper version if they like it.
Even better for publishers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31039202</id>
	<title>Re:Feudal corporatism in action</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1265363580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would have read that link if your keyboard had a "shift" key. A short paragraph like the comment I'm responding to is tolorable (barely), but for a tome like your link presented you really need proper capitalization and punctuation.</p><p>Rewrite it and I'll read it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would have read that link if your keyboard had a " shift " key .
A short paragraph like the comment I 'm responding to is tolorable ( barely ) , but for a tome like your link presented you really need proper capitalization and punctuation.Rewrite it and I 'll read it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would have read that link if your keyboard had a "shift" key.
A short paragraph like the comment I'm responding to is tolorable (barely), but for a tome like your link presented you really need proper capitalization and punctuation.Rewrite it and I'll read it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030938</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032660</id>
	<title>2 little thoughts</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265366160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is killing less trees a bad thing and have you read an ebook there annoying as hell I would much rather have a paper book.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is killing less trees a bad thing and have you read an ebook there annoying as hell I would much rather have a paper book .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is killing less trees a bad thing and have you read an ebook there annoying as hell I would much rather have a paper book.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031362</id>
	<title>Re:Books vs. E-books</title>
	<author>masmullin</author>
	<datestamp>1265307000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I rather enjoy my ereader.  It's superior to printed text because you can adjust the font size if your feeling bleery eyed.  eInk is about 95\% as good as paper, and I actually dislike turning pages.</p><p>With the ereader, I dont have to turn a page, I just press a button, which means that the book stays physically still... meaning I can prop it up on my belly or knees and read handsless (other than pressing the button).</p><p>The only bad things about ereaders right now are price and DRM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I rather enjoy my ereader .
It 's superior to printed text because you can adjust the font size if your feeling bleery eyed .
eInk is about 95 \ % as good as paper , and I actually dislike turning pages.With the ereader , I dont have to turn a page , I just press a button , which means that the book stays physically still... meaning I can prop it up on my belly or knees and read handsless ( other than pressing the button ) .The only bad things about ereaders right now are price and DRM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I rather enjoy my ereader.
It's superior to printed text because you can adjust the font size if your feeling bleery eyed.
eInk is about 95\% as good as paper, and I actually dislike turning pages.With the ereader, I dont have to turn a page, I just press a button, which means that the book stays physically still... meaning I can prop it up on my belly or knees and read handsless (other than pressing the button).The only bad things about ereaders right now are price and DRM.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031238</id>
	<title>Re:Just let Ebooks die already</title>
	<author>minorproblem</author>
	<datestamp>1265306160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I read about one novel a week, i have a large book library and a Sony PRS-300, and to tell you the truth i much prefer the E-book reader now as i don't have to worry about book storage or if i have a spare book with me. I tend to load up the next 4 or 5 books i plan to read so i am always ready to go.  Plus its light so easy to carry in my briefcase, and i can just pop it out while i am waiting for an appointment.</p><p>Only thing i really like now in printed form is my Saturday newspaper and cooking books.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I read about one novel a week , i have a large book library and a Sony PRS-300 , and to tell you the truth i much prefer the E-book reader now as i do n't have to worry about book storage or if i have a spare book with me .
I tend to load up the next 4 or 5 books i plan to read so i am always ready to go .
Plus its light so easy to carry in my briefcase , and i can just pop it out while i am waiting for an appointment.Only thing i really like now in printed form is my Saturday newspaper and cooking books .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read about one novel a week, i have a large book library and a Sony PRS-300, and to tell you the truth i much prefer the E-book reader now as i don't have to worry about book storage or if i have a spare book with me.
I tend to load up the next 4 or 5 books i plan to read so i am always ready to go.
Plus its light so easy to carry in my briefcase, and i can just pop it out while i am waiting for an appointment.Only thing i really like now in printed form is my Saturday newspaper and cooking books.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031704</id>
	<title>Re:Price??!?</title>
	<author>dgreer</author>
	<datestamp>1265309820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>blugu64...  that's interesting, your sig is a quote from a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. post from 2007.  Very interesting.</p><p>It is a good one though.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>blugu64... that 's interesting , your sig is a quote from a / .
post from 2007 .
Very interesting.It is a good one though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>blugu64...  that's interesting, your sig is a quote from a /.
post from 2007.
Very interesting.It is a good one though.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033644</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265379480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Hardcovers? Who buys hardcovers?</p></div><p>anyone that wants to buy the book when it comes out and not a few months later. I buy about 2 books a month, most of them are paperbacks. Sometimes a second or third book in a series comes out though and then you buy the hardcover. Hardcovers are for fans: If you can't wait to read it or if you know you are going to read it multiple times and you really like the author.</p><p>Good example: Harry potter, only for sale in hardcover when it comes out but most "fans" will buy (or loan) it then because they can't stand waiting months while they know they could read it now.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hardcovers ?
Who buys hardcovers ? anyone that wants to buy the book when it comes out and not a few months later .
I buy about 2 books a month , most of them are paperbacks .
Sometimes a second or third book in a series comes out though and then you buy the hardcover .
Hardcovers are for fans : If you ca n't wait to read it or if you know you are going to read it multiple times and you really like the author.Good example : Harry potter , only for sale in hardcover when it comes out but most " fans " will buy ( or loan ) it then because they ca n't stand waiting months while they know they could read it now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hardcovers?
Who buys hardcovers?anyone that wants to buy the book when it comes out and not a few months later.
I buy about 2 books a month, most of them are paperbacks.
Sometimes a second or third book in a series comes out though and then you buy the hardcover.
Hardcovers are for fans: If you can't wait to read it or if you know you are going to read it multiple times and you really like the author.Good example: Harry potter, only for sale in hardcover when it comes out but most "fans" will buy (or loan) it then because they can't stand waiting months while they know they could read it now.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31052814</id>
	<title>Re:Books</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265563380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Paper books will always live. One the one hand, there are still a billion people in the world without access to regular electricity.</p></div><p>E-ink ebook readers last weeks on a single charge. Intermittent electricity access is sufficient, and do you think most of those without regular electricity have many book, ebook readers could change that by making a lots of books practically free (that is after the ebook reader is paid for).</p><p>What about limited resources to make electrical devices?  I don't see that being much of an issue, silicon for the microchips is one of the most common elements available, lithium for rechargeable batteries can be extracted from seawater (more expensive than the mined stuff, but we won't exhaust that supply).  I may not be an expert, but I don't think there is anything we use to make electronics in general that we're likely to run out of.</p><p>Yeah, if civilisation collapsed then we'd have a problem, rebuilding what we've got could be a real problem without the plentiful supply of oil we've had, but unless that happens it isn't an issue.</p><p>On the whole, I think ebooks will be even more of a benefit to the worlds poor than it will be for the first world countries, even where electricity is in limited supply.  For example even in parts of Africa where they don't have electricity they still manage to use mobile phones, they share them and hook them up to a car battery to recharge them, and ebook readers use a lot less electricity than mobile phones do.</p><p>Today, I think the only real problem for ebooks is the cost of the readers, and I'm sure that'll come down.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Paper books will always live .
One the one hand , there are still a billion people in the world without access to regular electricity.E-ink ebook readers last weeks on a single charge .
Intermittent electricity access is sufficient , and do you think most of those without regular electricity have many book , ebook readers could change that by making a lots of books practically free ( that is after the ebook reader is paid for ) .What about limited resources to make electrical devices ?
I do n't see that being much of an issue , silicon for the microchips is one of the most common elements available , lithium for rechargeable batteries can be extracted from seawater ( more expensive than the mined stuff , but we wo n't exhaust that supply ) .
I may not be an expert , but I do n't think there is anything we use to make electronics in general that we 're likely to run out of.Yeah , if civilisation collapsed then we 'd have a problem , rebuilding what we 've got could be a real problem without the plentiful supply of oil we 've had , but unless that happens it is n't an issue.On the whole , I think ebooks will be even more of a benefit to the worlds poor than it will be for the first world countries , even where electricity is in limited supply .
For example even in parts of Africa where they do n't have electricity they still manage to use mobile phones , they share them and hook them up to a car battery to recharge them , and ebook readers use a lot less electricity than mobile phones do.Today , I think the only real problem for ebooks is the cost of the readers , and I 'm sure that 'll come down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paper books will always live.
One the one hand, there are still a billion people in the world without access to regular electricity.E-ink ebook readers last weeks on a single charge.
Intermittent electricity access is sufficient, and do you think most of those without regular electricity have many book, ebook readers could change that by making a lots of books practically free (that is after the ebook reader is paid for).What about limited resources to make electrical devices?
I don't see that being much of an issue, silicon for the microchips is one of the most common elements available, lithium for rechargeable batteries can be extracted from seawater (more expensive than the mined stuff, but we won't exhaust that supply).
I may not be an expert, but I don't think there is anything we use to make electronics in general that we're likely to run out of.Yeah, if civilisation collapsed then we'd have a problem, rebuilding what we've got could be a real problem without the plentiful supply of oil we've had, but unless that happens it isn't an issue.On the whole, I think ebooks will be even more of a benefit to the worlds poor than it will be for the first world countries, even where electricity is in limited supply.
For example even in parts of Africa where they don't have electricity they still manage to use mobile phones, they share them and hook them up to a car battery to recharge them, and ebook readers use a lot less electricity than mobile phones do.Today, I think the only real problem for ebooks is the cost of the readers, and I'm sure that'll come down.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030840</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031532</id>
	<title>Re:Not for My Personal Library</title>
	<author>LordLucless</author>
	<datestamp>1265308320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Huh? Amazon can't delete my ebooks any more than they can reach into my computer and delete all my word documents. Just don't use DRMed formats. That goes for anything: ebooks, music, video, documents. Your argument is against DRM, not against ebooks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Huh ?
Amazon ca n't delete my ebooks any more than they can reach into my computer and delete all my word documents .
Just do n't use DRMed formats .
That goes for anything : ebooks , music , video , documents .
Your argument is against DRM , not against ebooks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huh?
Amazon can't delete my ebooks any more than they can reach into my computer and delete all my word documents.
Just don't use DRMed formats.
That goes for anything: ebooks, music, video, documents.
Your argument is against DRM, not against ebooks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031052</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035070</id>
	<title>Why ebooks suck</title>
	<author>dave562</author>
	<datestamp>1265388840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I have a paper book and I think a friend of mine will enjoy it, I can hand the book off to them when they are done.  If they have a friend who will enjoy it, they can pass it along, etc.  With a paper book, once I'm done with it I can take it to a used book store and they will give me a small amount toward the purchase of another book.</p><p>eBooks completely destroy the second hand book market.  A paper book has some intrinsic value to others beyond the original purchaser.  In my mind, that alone makes it worth ~$15+ (hard cover).</p><p>Anyone who is willing to pay a similar amount for an eBook as they would pay for a physical book isn't very smart.</p><p>It looks like eBooks are looking to make a big push into the classroom.  Textbooks are already ridiculously expensive.  Does anything think that electronic textbooks are going to be any less expensive?  What will happen to the large number of students who are currently buying used text books?  That entire market disappears.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I have a paper book and I think a friend of mine will enjoy it , I can hand the book off to them when they are done .
If they have a friend who will enjoy it , they can pass it along , etc .
With a paper book , once I 'm done with it I can take it to a used book store and they will give me a small amount toward the purchase of another book.eBooks completely destroy the second hand book market .
A paper book has some intrinsic value to others beyond the original purchaser .
In my mind , that alone makes it worth ~ $ 15 + ( hard cover ) .Anyone who is willing to pay a similar amount for an eBook as they would pay for a physical book is n't very smart.It looks like eBooks are looking to make a big push into the classroom .
Textbooks are already ridiculously expensive .
Does anything think that electronic textbooks are going to be any less expensive ?
What will happen to the large number of students who are currently buying used text books ?
That entire market disappears .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I have a paper book and I think a friend of mine will enjoy it, I can hand the book off to them when they are done.
If they have a friend who will enjoy it, they can pass it along, etc.
With a paper book, once I'm done with it I can take it to a used book store and they will give me a small amount toward the purchase of another book.eBooks completely destroy the second hand book market.
A paper book has some intrinsic value to others beyond the original purchaser.
In my mind, that alone makes it worth ~$15+ (hard cover).Anyone who is willing to pay a similar amount for an eBook as they would pay for a physical book isn't very smart.It looks like eBooks are looking to make a big push into the classroom.
Textbooks are already ridiculously expensive.
Does anything think that electronic textbooks are going to be any less expensive?
What will happen to the large number of students who are currently buying used text books?
That entire market disappears.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031556</id>
	<title>The whole idea...</title>
	<author>emaxis</author>
	<datestamp>1265308440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isnt that the whole idea?! To save the trees ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Isnt that the whole idea ? !
To save the trees ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isnt that the whole idea?!
To save the trees ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031052</id>
	<title>Not for My Personal Library</title>
	<author>ScientiaPotentiaEst</author>
	<datestamp>1265304600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
For a work environment - holding temporal information, datasheets, etc. - OK.  For my library - my personal references and technical books - absolutely not.  Amazon demonstrated all too clearly what can (and will) happen.  Their deletion of "1984" and "Animal Farm" (how ironic) shows both a capability and willingness to prevent my ownership and ability to read books.  Refund be damned.
</p><p>
What does one do when formats shift and/or become obsolete (DRM preventing migration to a newer device)?  Or what if the eBook dies (much more likely than a paper library becoming unusable), taking my library with it.  Do I get to replace all those "soft" books for free?
</p><p>
I consider eBooks flawed fatally.  I won't be participating.  Ministry of Truth indeed.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For a work environment - holding temporal information , datasheets , etc .
- OK. For my library - my personal references and technical books - absolutely not .
Amazon demonstrated all too clearly what can ( and will ) happen .
Their deletion of " 1984 " and " Animal Farm " ( how ironic ) shows both a capability and willingness to prevent my ownership and ability to read books .
Refund be damned .
What does one do when formats shift and/or become obsolete ( DRM preventing migration to a newer device ) ?
Or what if the eBook dies ( much more likely than a paper library becoming unusable ) , taking my library with it .
Do I get to replace all those " soft " books for free ?
I consider eBooks flawed fatally .
I wo n't be participating .
Ministry of Truth indeed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
For a work environment - holding temporal information, datasheets, etc.
- OK.  For my library - my personal references and technical books - absolutely not.
Amazon demonstrated all too clearly what can (and will) happen.
Their deletion of "1984" and "Animal Farm" (how ironic) shows both a capability and willingness to prevent my ownership and ability to read books.
Refund be damned.
What does one do when formats shift and/or become obsolete (DRM preventing migration to a newer device)?
Or what if the eBook dies (much more likely than a paper library becoming unusable), taking my library with it.
Do I get to replace all those "soft" books for free?
I consider eBooks flawed fatally.
I won't be participating.
Ministry of Truth indeed.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032522</id>
	<title>Re:The information market was like the housing mar</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1265364300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No! Information is staying at the same price. The distribution costs, the publishing costs, the retail costs, the advertising costs are all going in the toilet. And good riddens, all that shit is (near) worthless anyways! Information is valuable. <br> <br>The populace generally needs to know that the creators of works aren't losing anything through this digital revolution. In fact they are gaining big time! They can reach way way way bigger audiences first off. Next there is a much lower barrier to entry, so all the little guys can join in. This is also good for avoiding 'selling out' since you won't have an overlord. All wonderful things for us and the creators. Only people missing out are useless vampires sucking the life out of art. If everyone realized this support in crushing the publishers/ w/e dinosaurs would be enormous.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No !
Information is staying at the same price .
The distribution costs , the publishing costs , the retail costs , the advertising costs are all going in the toilet .
And good riddens , all that shit is ( near ) worthless anyways !
Information is valuable .
The populace generally needs to know that the creators of works are n't losing anything through this digital revolution .
In fact they are gaining big time !
They can reach way way way bigger audiences first off .
Next there is a much lower barrier to entry , so all the little guys can join in .
This is also good for avoiding 'selling out ' since you wo n't have an overlord .
All wonderful things for us and the creators .
Only people missing out are useless vampires sucking the life out of art .
If everyone realized this support in crushing the publishers/ w/e dinosaurs would be enormous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No!
Information is staying at the same price.
The distribution costs, the publishing costs, the retail costs, the advertising costs are all going in the toilet.
And good riddens, all that shit is (near) worthless anyways!
Information is valuable.
The populace generally needs to know that the creators of works aren't losing anything through this digital revolution.
In fact they are gaining big time!
They can reach way way way bigger audiences first off.
Next there is a much lower barrier to entry, so all the little guys can join in.
This is also good for avoiding 'selling out' since you won't have an overlord.
All wonderful things for us and the creators.
Only people missing out are useless vampires sucking the life out of art.
If everyone realized this support in crushing the publishers/ w/e dinosaurs would be enormous.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032264</id>
	<title>Re:Prices</title>
	<author>brillow</author>
	<datestamp>1265361060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the deeper issue with publisher's hating ebooks is not fixed price points, but the idea that with an ebook a publisher is just unnecessary.  Sure a lot of authors are still going to want editors and proofreaders, but there is no need for the integration of all of that into a giant inefficient publishing house which is only going to limit you in the digital world (by deciding say, they won't sell through the biggest book retailer online).

Publishers hate ebooks because when they get really popular authors are going to start just publishing things themselves, and cut the publisher out.

The record companies feel the same way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the deeper issue with publisher 's hating ebooks is not fixed price points , but the idea that with an ebook a publisher is just unnecessary .
Sure a lot of authors are still going to want editors and proofreaders , but there is no need for the integration of all of that into a giant inefficient publishing house which is only going to limit you in the digital world ( by deciding say , they wo n't sell through the biggest book retailer online ) .
Publishers hate ebooks because when they get really popular authors are going to start just publishing things themselves , and cut the publisher out .
The record companies feel the same way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the deeper issue with publisher's hating ebooks is not fixed price points, but the idea that with an ebook a publisher is just unnecessary.
Sure a lot of authors are still going to want editors and proofreaders, but there is no need for the integration of all of that into a giant inefficient publishing house which is only going to limit you in the digital world (by deciding say, they won't sell through the biggest book retailer online).
Publishers hate ebooks because when they get really popular authors are going to start just publishing things themselves, and cut the publisher out.
The record companies feel the same way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030784</id>
	<title>"Murdoch Wants"</title>
	<author>plover</author>
	<datestamp>1265302560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well hell, there's reason enough for me to oppose whatever else is in the paragraph below, never mind TFA.</p><p>However, upon reading TFA I learned that he owns HarperCollins.  So there's another publisher I don't need to feel bad about ignoring.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well hell , there 's reason enough for me to oppose whatever else is in the paragraph below , never mind TFA.However , upon reading TFA I learned that he owns HarperCollins .
So there 's another publisher I do n't need to feel bad about ignoring .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well hell, there's reason enough for me to oppose whatever else is in the paragraph below, never mind TFA.However, upon reading TFA I learned that he owns HarperCollins.
So there's another publisher I don't need to feel bad about ignoring.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034906</id>
	<title>Re:9.99 isn't CHEAP for an ebook you don't own</title>
	<author>VoiceInTheDesert</author>
	<datestamp>1265387940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Eh...no, you don't own it, but anyone with a decent screen capture/screen snipping (which is built right into windows 7) program can very quickly turn it into "yours" without much trouble and without any possibility of being traced. Even a screen video capture as you flip through the pages (pause on each page, resume when "turning" page, rinse, repeat) pretty easily circumvents any protection on the files you download.
<br>
<br>
Certainly the library isn't going to take a printout of such images, but as far as sharing with friends? Couldn't be easier/cheaper for someone with a little technical knowledg.
<br>
<br>
Not that I would do that...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Eh...no , you do n't own it , but anyone with a decent screen capture/screen snipping ( which is built right into windows 7 ) program can very quickly turn it into " yours " without much trouble and without any possibility of being traced .
Even a screen video capture as you flip through the pages ( pause on each page , resume when " turning " page , rinse , repeat ) pretty easily circumvents any protection on the files you download .
Certainly the library is n't going to take a printout of such images , but as far as sharing with friends ?
Could n't be easier/cheaper for someone with a little technical knowledg .
Not that I would do that.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eh...no, you don't own it, but anyone with a decent screen capture/screen snipping (which is built right into windows 7) program can very quickly turn it into "yours" without much trouble and without any possibility of being traced.
Even a screen video capture as you flip through the pages (pause on each page, resume when "turning" page, rinse, repeat) pretty easily circumvents any protection on the files you download.
Certainly the library isn't going to take a printout of such images, but as far as sharing with friends?
Couldn't be easier/cheaper for someone with a little technical knowledg.
Not that I would do that...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031566</id>
	<title>eBooks</title>
	<author>mseeger</author>
	<datestamp>1265308500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Hi,
</p><p>
First of all i have to mention that i am addicted to reading.
</p><p>
This was already a problem as a kid: Once i was ill my aunt gave me five books as a gift. The next morning i called her and asked for more. In a hindsight, this was really embarrassing.
</p><p>
But once i started earning good money, this problem has multiplied. I am running out of shelf space. With my marriage i gave away about 1.000 books to friends just to have a little space for my wifes books.
</p><p>
So started with ebooks as a measure of self defence. I started with the Iliad Irex about 3-4 years ago. Since then i purchased several hundred ebooks. The good thing is: i drive on vacation without any fear of running out of input.
</p><p>
Therefor i am very interested in everything that concerns costs of books.
</p><p>
I totally hate any kind of DRM. Since i started i went through several different reader. Any restriction to move a book with me feels like theft. This one reason my favorite publisher is Baen. They have the most honest approach towards the reader. I think Eric Flints <a href="http://www.baen.com/library/" title="baen.com">Introducing the Baen Free Library</a> [baen.com] gives the best summary on that topic ever written.
</p><p>
I also worked as author, editor and publisher for books (on a very small scale). Therefor i know how much money is in the production (very little) and distribution (a lot) process and how little ends up with the authors. So i think that ebooks will greatly improve the percentage an author will get from the book sales (but not the overall revenue).
</p><p>
Current contracts give authors a certain percentage of all revenue. So it is in the interest of publishers and authors to get the prices as high as possible. But while the publishers still get the same share, they do a lot less for the sale of an ebook than for one of a paperback.
</p><p>
So at this point customers are on the side of Amazon, that an ebook should cost significantly less than a paper based book.
</p><p>
Currently the frontlines run between Amazon and the customers on one side and publishers and authors on the other. But the authors are not on that side due to their own interest but due to the current publishing system. I don't think that this situation will remain static. The publishers are bound to loose the authors as allies and then the fight next.
</p><p>
A typical question is: It's the same book, why shpould the reader pay less for an eboook?
</p><p>
It is the same book but it is not the same service. With a paper based book, they have to print it, ship it through the world, provide shelf space in the bookstore, pay the cashier guy,...
</p><p>
The transport of an ebook is by a factor 1.000 cheaper than a paper book, the cashier is fully automated, it does not take shelf space,....
</p><p>
If the producer has less costs, the product should become cheaper.
</p><p>
Where i agree: The author provides the same service, so he/she should get the same amount as before.
</p><p>
Who works less is the publisher and the bookstore. They should get less for an ebook.
</p><p>
The problem is the typical contract between author and publisher. Usually there is a certain fix percentage of the revenue (no matter wether ebook or paper book) designated for the author. While the percantage of an author at a book is around 10-15\%, it should be higher (e.g. 30\%) for ebooks. Of course the publishers are not in favor....
</p><p>
Publishers dislike ebooks not just due to the prices. If ebooks become too popular, the need for publishers is decreasing. An author could go just directly to Amazon without the help of publisher. Currently an ebook will not sell very well if there is no paper book to create demand. But this will change. The publishers (like the RIAA before them) wants to fight it. But they will have as much success as fighting entropy....
</p><p>
Personally i am totally in favor of the development. The service i am interested in is someone like Pat writing fascinating novels. I am also willing to pay for the editor and the distribution. But i am not interested in trees getting chopped down and trucks blowing carbon dioxide into the air while carrying harcovers.
</p><p>
CU, Martin
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi , First of all i have to mention that i am addicted to reading .
This was already a problem as a kid : Once i was ill my aunt gave me five books as a gift .
The next morning i called her and asked for more .
In a hindsight , this was really embarrassing .
But once i started earning good money , this problem has multiplied .
I am running out of shelf space .
With my marriage i gave away about 1.000 books to friends just to have a little space for my wifes books .
So started with ebooks as a measure of self defence .
I started with the Iliad Irex about 3-4 years ago .
Since then i purchased several hundred ebooks .
The good thing is : i drive on vacation without any fear of running out of input .
Therefor i am very interested in everything that concerns costs of books .
I totally hate any kind of DRM .
Since i started i went through several different reader .
Any restriction to move a book with me feels like theft .
This one reason my favorite publisher is Baen .
They have the most honest approach towards the reader .
I think Eric Flints Introducing the Baen Free Library [ baen.com ] gives the best summary on that topic ever written .
I also worked as author , editor and publisher for books ( on a very small scale ) .
Therefor i know how much money is in the production ( very little ) and distribution ( a lot ) process and how little ends up with the authors .
So i think that ebooks will greatly improve the percentage an author will get from the book sales ( but not the overall revenue ) .
Current contracts give authors a certain percentage of all revenue .
So it is in the interest of publishers and authors to get the prices as high as possible .
But while the publishers still get the same share , they do a lot less for the sale of an ebook than for one of a paperback .
So at this point customers are on the side of Amazon , that an ebook should cost significantly less than a paper based book .
Currently the frontlines run between Amazon and the customers on one side and publishers and authors on the other .
But the authors are not on that side due to their own interest but due to the current publishing system .
I do n't think that this situation will remain static .
The publishers are bound to loose the authors as allies and then the fight next .
A typical question is : It 's the same book , why shpould the reader pay less for an eboook ?
It is the same book but it is not the same service .
With a paper based book , they have to print it , ship it through the world , provide shelf space in the bookstore , pay the cashier guy,.. . The transport of an ebook is by a factor 1.000 cheaper than a paper book , the cashier is fully automated , it does not take shelf space,... . If the producer has less costs , the product should become cheaper .
Where i agree : The author provides the same service , so he/she should get the same amount as before .
Who works less is the publisher and the bookstore .
They should get less for an ebook .
The problem is the typical contract between author and publisher .
Usually there is a certain fix percentage of the revenue ( no matter wether ebook or paper book ) designated for the author .
While the percantage of an author at a book is around 10-15 \ % , it should be higher ( e.g .
30 \ % ) for ebooks .
Of course the publishers are not in favor... . Publishers dislike ebooks not just due to the prices .
If ebooks become too popular , the need for publishers is decreasing .
An author could go just directly to Amazon without the help of publisher .
Currently an ebook will not sell very well if there is no paper book to create demand .
But this will change .
The publishers ( like the RIAA before them ) wants to fight it .
But they will have as much success as fighting entropy... . Personally i am totally in favor of the development .
The service i am interested in is someone like Pat writing fascinating novels .
I am also willing to pay for the editor and the distribution .
But i am not interested in trees getting chopped down and trucks blowing carbon dioxide into the air while carrying harcovers .
CU , Martin</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Hi,

First of all i have to mention that i am addicted to reading.
This was already a problem as a kid: Once i was ill my aunt gave me five books as a gift.
The next morning i called her and asked for more.
In a hindsight, this was really embarrassing.
But once i started earning good money, this problem has multiplied.
I am running out of shelf space.
With my marriage i gave away about 1.000 books to friends just to have a little space for my wifes books.
So started with ebooks as a measure of self defence.
I started with the Iliad Irex about 3-4 years ago.
Since then i purchased several hundred ebooks.
The good thing is: i drive on vacation without any fear of running out of input.
Therefor i am very interested in everything that concerns costs of books.
I totally hate any kind of DRM.
Since i started i went through several different reader.
Any restriction to move a book with me feels like theft.
This one reason my favorite publisher is Baen.
They have the most honest approach towards the reader.
I think Eric Flints Introducing the Baen Free Library [baen.com] gives the best summary on that topic ever written.
I also worked as author, editor and publisher for books (on a very small scale).
Therefor i know how much money is in the production (very little) and distribution (a lot) process and how little ends up with the authors.
So i think that ebooks will greatly improve the percentage an author will get from the book sales (but not the overall revenue).
Current contracts give authors a certain percentage of all revenue.
So it is in the interest of publishers and authors to get the prices as high as possible.
But while the publishers still get the same share, they do a lot less for the sale of an ebook than for one of a paperback.
So at this point customers are on the side of Amazon, that an ebook should cost significantly less than a paper based book.
Currently the frontlines run between Amazon and the customers on one side and publishers and authors on the other.
But the authors are not on that side due to their own interest but due to the current publishing system.
I don't think that this situation will remain static.
The publishers are bound to loose the authors as allies and then the fight next.
A typical question is: It's the same book, why shpould the reader pay less for an eboook?
It is the same book but it is not the same service.
With a paper based book, they have to print it, ship it through the world, provide shelf space in the bookstore, pay the cashier guy,...

The transport of an ebook is by a factor 1.000 cheaper than a paper book, the cashier is fully automated, it does not take shelf space,....

If the producer has less costs, the product should become cheaper.
Where i agree: The author provides the same service, so he/she should get the same amount as before.
Who works less is the publisher and the bookstore.
They should get less for an ebook.
The problem is the typical contract between author and publisher.
Usually there is a certain fix percentage of the revenue (no matter wether ebook or paper book) designated for the author.
While the percantage of an author at a book is around 10-15\%, it should be higher (e.g.
30\%) for ebooks.
Of course the publishers are not in favor....

Publishers dislike ebooks not just due to the prices.
If ebooks become too popular, the need for publishers is decreasing.
An author could go just directly to Amazon without the help of publisher.
Currently an ebook will not sell very well if there is no paper book to create demand.
But this will change.
The publishers (like the RIAA before them) wants to fight it.
But they will have as much success as fighting entropy....

Personally i am totally in favor of the development.
The service i am interested in is someone like Pat writing fascinating novels.
I am also willing to pay for the editor and the distribution.
But i am not interested in trees getting chopped down and trucks blowing carbon dioxide into the air while carrying harcovers.
CU, Martin
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033482</id>
	<title>Re:Of Course it devalues Books</title>
	<author>Half-pint HAL</author>
	<datestamp>1265377920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Very few book publishers deal in scarcity.  Publishers print as many books as they think they can sell.  If they sell out and they still have orders outstanding, they print more.  Costs of medium- to long-term storage for unsold books often outstrips the physical cost of the book, so overstock is discouraged by the market.</p><p>All in all, print publishing is a mature market and is ruled by a very refined balance of supply and demand.  It is not some evil profit muncher.</p><p>HAL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Very few book publishers deal in scarcity .
Publishers print as many books as they think they can sell .
If they sell out and they still have orders outstanding , they print more .
Costs of medium- to long-term storage for unsold books often outstrips the physical cost of the book , so overstock is discouraged by the market.All in all , print publishing is a mature market and is ruled by a very refined balance of supply and demand .
It is not some evil profit muncher.HAL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Very few book publishers deal in scarcity.
Publishers print as many books as they think they can sell.
If they sell out and they still have orders outstanding, they print more.
Costs of medium- to long-term storage for unsold books often outstrips the physical cost of the book, so overstock is discouraged by the market.All in all, print publishing is a mature market and is ruled by a very refined balance of supply and demand.
It is not some evil profit muncher.HAL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031630</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031496</id>
	<title>I don't understand</title>
	<author>Zebra\_X</author>
	<datestamp>1265308080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This must have been what it was like when the library was created. All the publishers were upset no one would go and buy their books. In fact I imagine that the very concept if it didn't already exist, of the library would cause an unimaginable shit storm now.</p><p>I bring this up because the library in direct competition with publishers desires to sell more books. However, people still buy books. People still have bookshelves - and people still want to put books on those shelves.</p><p>eBooks are a new medium - they compete in a way with paper books. However nothing will replace the paper book and the book shelves at home, at least not for my generation.</p><p>I don't really understand how the publishing companies can't increase their profit margins on eBooks - there is a whole physical plant that can be done away with if they would just embrace the eBook. If amazon and apple are taking too much profit for doing very little - then the publishing companies should kick em' where it hurts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This must have been what it was like when the library was created .
All the publishers were upset no one would go and buy their books .
In fact I imagine that the very concept if it did n't already exist , of the library would cause an unimaginable shit storm now.I bring this up because the library in direct competition with publishers desires to sell more books .
However , people still buy books .
People still have bookshelves - and people still want to put books on those shelves.eBooks are a new medium - they compete in a way with paper books .
However nothing will replace the paper book and the book shelves at home , at least not for my generation.I do n't really understand how the publishing companies ca n't increase their profit margins on eBooks - there is a whole physical plant that can be done away with if they would just embrace the eBook .
If amazon and apple are taking too much profit for doing very little - then the publishing companies should kick em ' where it hurts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This must have been what it was like when the library was created.
All the publishers were upset no one would go and buy their books.
In fact I imagine that the very concept if it didn't already exist, of the library would cause an unimaginable shit storm now.I bring this up because the library in direct competition with publishers desires to sell more books.
However, people still buy books.
People still have bookshelves - and people still want to put books on those shelves.eBooks are a new medium - they compete in a way with paper books.
However nothing will replace the paper book and the book shelves at home, at least not for my generation.I don't really understand how the publishing companies can't increase their profit margins on eBooks - there is a whole physical plant that can be done away with if they would just embrace the eBook.
If amazon and apple are taking too much profit for doing very little - then the publishing companies should kick em' where it hurts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032102</id>
	<title>Re:This just in...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265401260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A literary writer should be able to email his contact list with 'My new noval is ready! Hear is teh frist chaptor, send me sum moneys and i will email you a watermarked copy of the full book. Plz forward to all your peeps, kthxbai'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A literary writer should be able to email his contact list with 'My new noval is ready !
Hear is teh frist chaptor , send me sum moneys and i will email you a watermarked copy of the full book .
Plz forward to all your peeps , kthxbai' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A literary writer should be able to email his contact list with 'My new noval is ready!
Hear is teh frist chaptor, send me sum moneys and i will email you a watermarked copy of the full book.
Plz forward to all your peeps, kthxbai'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031640</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030930</id>
	<title>For what it's worth</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265303820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Hardcovers are for collectors and college textbook extortionists.
</p><p>
Softcovers are for the readers.
</p><p>
E-books are, I'm only guessing, for the new kids.
</p><p>
Who the fuck reads books anyways these days?!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hardcovers are for collectors and college textbook extortionists .
Softcovers are for the readers .
E-books are , I 'm only guessing , for the new kids .
Who the fuck reads books anyways these days ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Hardcovers are for collectors and college textbook extortionists.
Softcovers are for the readers.
E-books are, I'm only guessing, for the new kids.
Who the fuck reads books anyways these days?
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030794</id>
	<title>Price??!?</title>
	<author>blugu64</author>
	<datestamp>1265302620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First they have to be cheaper then paper books.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First they have to be cheaper then paper books .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First they have to be cheaper then paper books.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031666</id>
	<title>Re:So what he's saying is...</title>
	<author>electrons\_are\_brave</author>
	<datestamp>1265309460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can someone tell me what the ebook thinggy in the picture that goes with the article is?

It looks quite good - is it a kindle?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can someone tell me what the ebook thinggy in the picture that goes with the article is ?
It looks quite good - is it a kindle ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can someone tell me what the ebook thinggy in the picture that goes with the article is?
It looks quite good - is it a kindle?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030786</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034436</id>
	<title>eBooks kill</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265385240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I read in the bathtub you insensitive clod!<br>an ebook could kill me!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I read in the bathtub you insensitive clod ! an ebook could kill me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read in the bathtub you insensitive clod!an ebook could kill me!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031508</id>
	<title>Re:Just let Ebooks die already</title>
	<author>LordLucless</author>
	<datestamp>1265308140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Huh? Why do eBooks necessitate DRM in your mind? I've got plenty of eBooks that aren't restricted. And you suggest using PDFs instead. Why don't PDFs count as eBooks? Because they're in your preferred format? PDFs are absolutely useless to read unless you've got a device that will display the whole rendered with of the PDF legibly. Much more useful are formats that allow text re-flowing so you read them on mobile devices with smaller screen-widths.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Huh ?
Why do eBooks necessitate DRM in your mind ?
I 've got plenty of eBooks that are n't restricted .
And you suggest using PDFs instead .
Why do n't PDFs count as eBooks ?
Because they 're in your preferred format ?
PDFs are absolutely useless to read unless you 've got a device that will display the whole rendered with of the PDF legibly .
Much more useful are formats that allow text re-flowing so you read them on mobile devices with smaller screen-widths .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huh?
Why do eBooks necessitate DRM in your mind?
I've got plenty of eBooks that aren't restricted.
And you suggest using PDFs instead.
Why don't PDFs count as eBooks?
Because they're in your preferred format?
PDFs are absolutely useless to read unless you've got a device that will display the whole rendered with of the PDF legibly.
Much more useful are formats that allow text re-flowing so you read them on mobile devices with smaller screen-widths.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031390</id>
	<title>Re:Prices</title>
	<author>Samgilljoy</author>
	<datestamp>1265307120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Umm, the editor and proofreader are part of the publishing organization.  It is not at all uncommon for $1 to go to the author of a book that sells for $14.95.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Umm , the editor and proofreader are part of the publishing organization .
It is not at all uncommon for $ 1 to go to the author of a book that sells for $ 14.95 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Umm, the editor and proofreader are part of the publishing organization.
It is not at all uncommon for $1 to go to the author of a book that sells for $14.95.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030800</id>
	<title>9.99 isn't CHEAP for an ebook you don't own</title>
	<author>jaymz666</author>
	<datestamp>1265302680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't own the book, you can't sell it, you can't loan it and you can't donate it to a library. The paperback edition will eventually cost less than the 9.99 to 14.99 that Macmillan wants to charge. They need to enter the real world where you can go to a used bookstore a couple of months after a book is published and get it for less than their ebook prices.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't own the book , you ca n't sell it , you ca n't loan it and you ca n't donate it to a library .
The paperback edition will eventually cost less than the 9.99 to 14.99 that Macmillan wants to charge .
They need to enter the real world where you can go to a used bookstore a couple of months after a book is published and get it for less than their ebook prices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't own the book, you can't sell it, you can't loan it and you can't donate it to a library.
The paperback edition will eventually cost less than the 9.99 to 14.99 that Macmillan wants to charge.
They need to enter the real world where you can go to a used bookstore a couple of months after a book is published and get it for less than their ebook prices.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032656</id>
	<title>Send large files, but why when I can buy the book!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265366040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why pay for the cost of downloading books, is it really that much cheaper than buying paper books? Maybe that's a stupid question. There must be some advantage to paper or everyone and their dog would have an on-line e-publishing company.</p><p>
&nbsp; <a href="http://www.swapitencryptit.com/" title="swapitencryptit.com" rel="nofollow">Swap it! Encrypt it!</a> [swapitencryptit.com] | <a href="http://www.transferfiles.us/" title="transferfiles.us" rel="nofollow">Transfer files - Send large files</a> [transferfiles.us] </p><p><a href="http://www.sendlargefiles.biz/" title="sendlargefiles.biz" rel="nofollow">www.swapitencryptit.com</a> [sendlargefiles.biz]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why pay for the cost of downloading books , is it really that much cheaper than buying paper books ?
Maybe that 's a stupid question .
There must be some advantage to paper or everyone and their dog would have an on-line e-publishing company .
  Swap it !
Encrypt it !
[ swapitencryptit.com ] | Transfer files - Send large files [ transferfiles.us ] www.swapitencryptit.com [ sendlargefiles.biz ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why pay for the cost of downloading books, is it really that much cheaper than buying paper books?
Maybe that's a stupid question.
There must be some advantage to paper or everyone and their dog would have an on-line e-publishing company.
  Swap it!
Encrypt it!
[swapitencryptit.com] | Transfer files - Send large files [transferfiles.us] www.swapitencryptit.com [sendlargefiles.biz]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030978</id>
	<title>Just let Ebooks die already</title>
	<author>Billly Gates</author>
	<datestamp>1265304180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They wont take off. 10 years have passed and for some odd reason consumers are ditching DRM invested files for the real thing they can resell or lend to a friend and wont need a $300 device with a crummy screen.</p><p>I like technology. I really do, but the whole ebooks thing is bad. Just use pdfs that are not drmed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They wont take off .
10 years have passed and for some odd reason consumers are ditching DRM invested files for the real thing they can resell or lend to a friend and wont need a $ 300 device with a crummy screen.I like technology .
I really do , but the whole ebooks thing is bad .
Just use pdfs that are not drmed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They wont take off.
10 years have passed and for some odd reason consumers are ditching DRM invested files for the real thing they can resell or lend to a friend and wont need a $300 device with a crummy screen.I like technology.
I really do, but the whole ebooks thing is bad.
Just use pdfs that are not drmed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31044934</id>
	<title>forget paper</title>
	<author>marcuz</author>
	<datestamp>1265464080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>finally! no more trees cut down for mostly junk literature...</htmltext>
<tokenext>finally !
no more trees cut down for mostly junk literature.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>finally!
no more trees cut down for mostly junk literature...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031344</id>
	<title>Re:Prices</title>
	<author>blitziod</author>
	<datestamp>1265306760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>ok first off you are viewing publishing in the context of print books.  The switch to eformats( it will happen) will change the upfront costs. secondly much of the cost of selling books retail involves shipping( huge costs) and markup for the retailer.  Retailers have limited shelf space and high costs for labor, etc.They have to recoup those or fold.  Ebooks will eventually be sold with a tiny markup by the retailer OR direct from the publisher.

The new market will eliminate shipping, retail space costs, most retail markup.  More importantly it will eliminate printing books that do not sell.  Many books do not sell.  Printing a book may cost 5 bucks but if you print 3 for every one you sell WHOA thats 15 per book.  Also the move to ebooks eliminates the vast amounts of capital publishing requires. This will allow publishers to publish many more books.  Also by spending former production costs on marketing sell they can sell more copies also, to a point.

The question is WHY book publishers have not moved faster to ditch paper and trucks in favor of electrons and cables?  I predict more books will come out ONLY on ebook soon and not just junkie fan fiction or how to manuals.  Universities( and students) should be the first to insist on ebooks to curtail the insane price of text books.  A sensible ebook lending policy could cause libraries to buy thousands more books( no need for a bigger building, or a library visit, or even to live in the same city) thus improving sales of some titles.  Imagine a national lending library for ebooks funded by a small donation made at the point of purchase( click here to donate 1 dollar to put a copy of this book in the national library).  The amount of good for the people(including the industry) that can come from this is HUGE.  But it will hurt some existing profit models..so what.

For now I just pirate books on to my kindle at a ratio of around 10:1 to compensate for the gouging done by ebook retailers.  For murdoch's company i guess i will raise that ratio to 15:1( or higher) now..no big deal...please join me in this act of revolution and make ebooks more common.</htmltext>
<tokenext>ok first off you are viewing publishing in the context of print books .
The switch to eformats ( it will happen ) will change the upfront costs .
secondly much of the cost of selling books retail involves shipping ( huge costs ) and markup for the retailer .
Retailers have limited shelf space and high costs for labor , etc.They have to recoup those or fold .
Ebooks will eventually be sold with a tiny markup by the retailer OR direct from the publisher .
The new market will eliminate shipping , retail space costs , most retail markup .
More importantly it will eliminate printing books that do not sell .
Many books do not sell .
Printing a book may cost 5 bucks but if you print 3 for every one you sell WHOA thats 15 per book .
Also the move to ebooks eliminates the vast amounts of capital publishing requires .
This will allow publishers to publish many more books .
Also by spending former production costs on marketing sell they can sell more copies also , to a point .
The question is WHY book publishers have not moved faster to ditch paper and trucks in favor of electrons and cables ?
I predict more books will come out ONLY on ebook soon and not just junkie fan fiction or how to manuals .
Universities ( and students ) should be the first to insist on ebooks to curtail the insane price of text books .
A sensible ebook lending policy could cause libraries to buy thousands more books ( no need for a bigger building , or a library visit , or even to live in the same city ) thus improving sales of some titles .
Imagine a national lending library for ebooks funded by a small donation made at the point of purchase ( click here to donate 1 dollar to put a copy of this book in the national library ) .
The amount of good for the people ( including the industry ) that can come from this is HUGE .
But it will hurt some existing profit models..so what .
For now I just pirate books on to my kindle at a ratio of around 10 : 1 to compensate for the gouging done by ebook retailers .
For murdoch 's company i guess i will raise that ratio to 15 : 1 ( or higher ) now..no big deal...please join me in this act of revolution and make ebooks more common .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ok first off you are viewing publishing in the context of print books.
The switch to eformats( it will happen) will change the upfront costs.
secondly much of the cost of selling books retail involves shipping( huge costs) and markup for the retailer.
Retailers have limited shelf space and high costs for labor, etc.They have to recoup those or fold.
Ebooks will eventually be sold with a tiny markup by the retailer OR direct from the publisher.
The new market will eliminate shipping, retail space costs, most retail markup.
More importantly it will eliminate printing books that do not sell.
Many books do not sell.
Printing a book may cost 5 bucks but if you print 3 for every one you sell WHOA thats 15 per book.
Also the move to ebooks eliminates the vast amounts of capital publishing requires.
This will allow publishers to publish many more books.
Also by spending former production costs on marketing sell they can sell more copies also, to a point.
The question is WHY book publishers have not moved faster to ditch paper and trucks in favor of electrons and cables?
I predict more books will come out ONLY on ebook soon and not just junkie fan fiction or how to manuals.
Universities( and students) should be the first to insist on ebooks to curtail the insane price of text books.
A sensible ebook lending policy could cause libraries to buy thousands more books( no need for a bigger building, or a library visit, or even to live in the same city) thus improving sales of some titles.
Imagine a national lending library for ebooks funded by a small donation made at the point of purchase( click here to donate 1 dollar to put a copy of this book in the national library).
The amount of good for the people(including the industry) that can come from this is HUGE.
But it will hurt some existing profit models..so what.
For now I just pirate books on to my kindle at a ratio of around 10:1 to compensate for the gouging done by ebook retailers.
For murdoch's company i guess i will raise that ratio to 15:1( or higher) now..no big deal...please join me in this act of revolution and make ebooks more common.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031004</id>
	<title>Re:Books vs. E-books</title>
	<author>bloodhawk</author>
	<datestamp>1265304360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have been in IT now for just on 20 years, I do everything electronically and my house is fully wired. But give me a paper based book over an e-book any day. I have tried a few of the e-book readers now and I can honestly say I hate them all utterly and completely. I read on average a novel every 2-3 weeks and I will happily pay more for dead-tree books simply for the better experience they provide.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been in IT now for just on 20 years , I do everything electronically and my house is fully wired .
But give me a paper based book over an e-book any day .
I have tried a few of the e-book readers now and I can honestly say I hate them all utterly and completely .
I read on average a novel every 2-3 weeks and I will happily pay more for dead-tree books simply for the better experience they provide .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been in IT now for just on 20 years, I do everything electronically and my house is fully wired.
But give me a paper based book over an e-book any day.
I have tried a few of the e-book readers now and I can honestly say I hate them all utterly and completely.
I read on average a novel every 2-3 weeks and I will happily pay more for dead-tree books simply for the better experience they provide.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032906</id>
	<title>Video killed...</title>
	<author>siglercm</author>
	<datestamp>1265369460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... the radio star.  (Or not.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... the radio star .
( Or not .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... the radio star.
(Or not.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31037320</id>
	<title>Re:Silly Rupert</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1265398440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone who practices the religion of Capitalism thinks everything exists for the sole purpose of carrying a price tag.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone who practices the religion of Capitalism thinks everything exists for the sole purpose of carrying a price tag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone who practices the religion of Capitalism thinks everything exists for the sole purpose of carrying a price tag.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030914</id>
	<title>Tough Choice</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1265303640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I sided with Macmillan in this little argument, because I think the way Amazon acted was really shitty and totally lacking in class. But when Rupert fucking Murdoch starts speaking out against Amazon, it almost makes me want to side with Amazon. Almost. I guess I can always just hate them both.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I sided with Macmillan in this little argument , because I think the way Amazon acted was really shitty and totally lacking in class .
But when Rupert fucking Murdoch starts speaking out against Amazon , it almost makes me want to side with Amazon .
Almost. I guess I can always just hate them both .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I sided with Macmillan in this little argument, because I think the way Amazon acted was really shitty and totally lacking in class.
But when Rupert fucking Murdoch starts speaking out against Amazon, it almost makes me want to side with Amazon.
Almost. I guess I can always just hate them both.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031048</id>
	<title>Re:iPad</title>
	<author>pookemon</author>
	<datestamp>1265304600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hmm a very good idea.  And the portability i very attractive.  It means I could take my GQ subscription to work instead of just reading it at home.<br> <br>
David K.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm a very good idea .
And the portability i very attractive .
It means I could take my GQ subscription to work instead of just reading it at home .
David K .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm a very good idea.
And the portability i very attractive.
It means I could take my GQ subscription to work instead of just reading it at home.
David K.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033798</id>
	<title>Re:Books vs. E-books</title>
	<author>justleavealonemmmkay</author>
	<datestamp>1265380740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know, the term "dead tree" may have been funny the first time it was coined (around 1200AD when vellum fell out of use), but it's not anymore. Ever heard of the word "paper"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , the term " dead tree " may have been funny the first time it was coined ( around 1200AD when vellum fell out of use ) , but it 's not anymore .
Ever heard of the word " paper " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, the term "dead tree" may have been funny the first time it was coined (around 1200AD when vellum fell out of use), but it's not anymore.
Ever heard of the word "paper"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31037278</id>
	<title>For Murdoch</title>
	<author>justkeeper</author>
	<datestamp>1265398260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>To quote Confucius: To get old and not die: a parasite!</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>To quote Confucius : To get old and not die : a parasite !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To quote Confucius: To get old and not die: a parasite!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031182</id>
	<title>Re:Prices</title>
	<author>jaymz666</author>
	<datestamp>1265305680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Comparing a physical book to an ebook is an apples to oranges comparison. You physical book is sellable, loanable, donatable and not DRMed.<br>The retail markup? That's what? 40\%? hmmmm<br>So, "The Help" by Kathryn Stockett is a best seller right now, with an MSRP of 24.95. Amazon lists it for 9.50 physical book and 8.55 Kindle version.<br>Which do you think is more profitable?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Comparing a physical book to an ebook is an apples to oranges comparison .
You physical book is sellable , loanable , donatable and not DRMed.The retail markup ?
That 's what ?
40 \ % ? hmmmmSo , " The Help " by Kathryn Stockett is a best seller right now , with an MSRP of 24.95 .
Amazon lists it for 9.50 physical book and 8.55 Kindle version.Which do you think is more profitable ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Comparing a physical book to an ebook is an apples to oranges comparison.
You physical book is sellable, loanable, donatable and not DRMed.The retail markup?
That's what?
40\%? hmmmmSo, "The Help" by Kathryn Stockett is a best seller right now, with an MSRP of 24.95.
Amazon lists it for 9.50 physical book and 8.55 Kindle version.Which do you think is more profitable?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031440</id>
	<title>If you build it, they will come...</title>
	<author>Ximok</author>
	<datestamp>1265307600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I'm afraid this automobile thing will devalue the horse, so we should outlaw it"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I 'm afraid this automobile thing will devalue the horse , so we should outlaw it "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I'm afraid this automobile thing will devalue the horse, so we should outlaw it"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030776</id>
	<title>This just in...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265302440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>another old wrinkly dinosaur doesn't like change!  news at 11.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>another old wrinkly dinosaur does n't like change !
news at 11 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>another old wrinkly dinosaur doesn't like change!
news at 11.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031806</id>
	<title>Re:Just let Ebooks die already</title>
	<author>MtViewGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1265311020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're seen the e-ink based electronic book reader such as the Sony Reader, I have to disagree with you. With e-ink, the text is very sharp and readable, and the weight of the PRS-600 Sony Reader with touchscreen interface is around 10 ounces--lighter than many hardback novels nowadays. If you're going on a trip and plan to read a lot, lot easier to carry one PRS-600 than carrying a whole bunch of books.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're seen the e-ink based electronic book reader such as the Sony Reader , I have to disagree with you .
With e-ink , the text is very sharp and readable , and the weight of the PRS-600 Sony Reader with touchscreen interface is around 10 ounces--lighter than many hardback novels nowadays .
If you 're going on a trip and plan to read a lot , lot easier to carry one PRS-600 than carrying a whole bunch of books .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're seen the e-ink based electronic book reader such as the Sony Reader, I have to disagree with you.
With e-ink, the text is very sharp and readable, and the weight of the PRS-600 Sony Reader with touchscreen interface is around 10 ounces--lighter than many hardback novels nowadays.
If you're going on a trip and plan to read a lot, lot easier to carry one PRS-600 than carrying a whole bunch of books.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033554</id>
	<title>Reselling</title>
	<author>pubwvj</author>
	<datestamp>1265378700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And we retain the right to resell our used copies...</p><p>Otherwise we just buy the paper books and force the publisher to waste money on printing, paper, ink, transportation, filing, over runs, etc.</p><p>The reality is the eBooks cost the publishers far, far less than paper books.</p><p>I know. I was a publisher and editor for decades.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And we retain the right to resell our used copies...Otherwise we just buy the paper books and force the publisher to waste money on printing , paper , ink , transportation , filing , over runs , etc.The reality is the eBooks cost the publishers far , far less than paper books.I know .
I was a publisher and editor for decades .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And we retain the right to resell our used copies...Otherwise we just buy the paper books and force the publisher to waste money on printing, paper, ink, transportation, filing, over runs, etc.The reality is the eBooks cost the publishers far, far less than paper books.I know.
I was a publisher and editor for decades.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031224</id>
	<title>One other thing</title>
	<author>koan</author>
	<datestamp>1265305980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>STOP CALLING THEM DEAD TREE BOOKS, if you used hemp fiber you wouldn't be killing a tree, and no one seems to cry when a pot plant gets smoked....wake up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>STOP CALLING THEM DEAD TREE BOOKS , if you used hemp fiber you would n't be killing a tree , and no one seems to cry when a pot plant gets smoked....wake up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>STOP CALLING THEM DEAD TREE BOOKS, if you used hemp fiber you wouldn't be killing a tree, and no one seems to cry when a pot plant gets smoked....wake up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030936</id>
	<title>A "green" solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265303820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are still paying for the book...minus the cost of all that paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are still paying for the book...minus the cost of all that paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are still paying for the book...minus the cost of all that paper.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031872</id>
	<title>Re:This just in...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265311740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I get the feeling that libraries and avid paper / book reading won't "survive" the next generation shifts in 1st world countries.  I don't see us older people as connected with today's web 2.0 media as much as the kid next door. The same way that we created a generational market for videogames thanks to the 70s and 80s, I see the following 2 decades as having trained the AOL-loving, chat crazy, web savvy but "I learned this computer thing at the school lab" generation, that doesn't understand our effort in having taken courses and READING manuals and complex textbooks related to the tech field.</p><p>What I mean is that they don't seem to read newspapers, books and print for work and as much as your average 30+ commuter.  Our sight decreases as we get older so the e-readers won't exactly be usable as we age. Not to say that the youngsters read nothing; the mostly read myspace / facebook posts and watch online versions of our tv programs because they don't mind the quality loss. If they never focus on print reading and pen / letter writing, though, the ebook market may not be profitable after my generation starts dying out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I get the feeling that libraries and avid paper / book reading wo n't " survive " the next generation shifts in 1st world countries .
I do n't see us older people as connected with today 's web 2.0 media as much as the kid next door .
The same way that we created a generational market for videogames thanks to the 70s and 80s , I see the following 2 decades as having trained the AOL-loving , chat crazy , web savvy but " I learned this computer thing at the school lab " generation , that does n't understand our effort in having taken courses and READING manuals and complex textbooks related to the tech field.What I mean is that they do n't seem to read newspapers , books and print for work and as much as your average 30 + commuter .
Our sight decreases as we get older so the e-readers wo n't exactly be usable as we age .
Not to say that the youngsters read nothing ; the mostly read myspace / facebook posts and watch online versions of our tv programs because they do n't mind the quality loss .
If they never focus on print reading and pen / letter writing , though , the ebook market may not be profitable after my generation starts dying out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I get the feeling that libraries and avid paper / book reading won't "survive" the next generation shifts in 1st world countries.
I don't see us older people as connected with today's web 2.0 media as much as the kid next door.
The same way that we created a generational market for videogames thanks to the 70s and 80s, I see the following 2 decades as having trained the AOL-loving, chat crazy, web savvy but "I learned this computer thing at the school lab" generation, that doesn't understand our effort in having taken courses and READING manuals and complex textbooks related to the tech field.What I mean is that they don't seem to read newspapers, books and print for work and as much as your average 30+ commuter.
Our sight decreases as we get older so the e-readers won't exactly be usable as we age.
Not to say that the youngsters read nothing; the mostly read myspace / facebook posts and watch online versions of our tv programs because they don't mind the quality loss.
If they never focus on print reading and pen / letter writing, though, the ebook market may not be profitable after my generation starts dying out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031030</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032002</id>
	<title>Re:iPad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265313360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The New York Times is not owned by News Corp.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The New York Times is not owned by News Corp .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The New York Times is not owned by News Corp.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031036</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032164</id>
	<title>Well Yeh</title>
	<author>b4upoo</author>
	<datestamp>1265402520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>        Sure ebooks hurt the retail merchants but so what? Industries are not protected nor should they be. Buggy builders were slaughtered by the automobile. The telegraph industry was murdered by the telephone and computer industry. Telephone operators were blown out of work by electronic switchboards. Lawn workers were smacked down by gasoline mowers.  The list is endless. So just why are we to be concerned about the loss of retail book sellers? Take a peek at movie theaters. In 1930 theaters were absolutely enormous. Today there is no such thing as a theater that seats 20,000. Soon even the small theaters that still exist will probably vanish as the television industry has better and better technology.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure ebooks hurt the retail merchants but so what ?
Industries are not protected nor should they be .
Buggy builders were slaughtered by the automobile .
The telegraph industry was murdered by the telephone and computer industry .
Telephone operators were blown out of work by electronic switchboards .
Lawn workers were smacked down by gasoline mowers .
The list is endless .
So just why are we to be concerned about the loss of retail book sellers ?
Take a peek at movie theaters .
In 1930 theaters were absolutely enormous .
Today there is no such thing as a theater that seats 20,000 .
Soon even the small theaters that still exist will probably vanish as the television industry has better and better technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>        Sure ebooks hurt the retail merchants but so what?
Industries are not protected nor should they be.
Buggy builders were slaughtered by the automobile.
The telegraph industry was murdered by the telephone and computer industry.
Telephone operators were blown out of work by electronic switchboards.
Lawn workers were smacked down by gasoline mowers.
The list is endless.
So just why are we to be concerned about the loss of retail book sellers?
Take a peek at movie theaters.
In 1930 theaters were absolutely enormous.
Today there is no such thing as a theater that seats 20,000.
Soon even the small theaters that still exist will probably vanish as the television industry has better and better technology.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031280</id>
	<title>Re:9.99 isn't CHEAP for an ebook you don't own</title>
	<author>raddan</author>
	<datestamp>1265306400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Publishers have a firm grasp on the real world*.  What they're hoping is that you won't be <em>bothered</em> to go to the used bookstore to get that book.  Or even when it is convenient (like Amazon Marketplace), you are too impatient to wait.  So far, the sales figures seem to bear this out.  Convenience wins.
<br> <br>
 In music, of course, this revolution has come and gone, but-- I don't like downloading MP3s.  I buy CDs, a good chunk of those used, either online or at the place down the street.  I think of this as an 'automatic backup' of sorts.  My friends, particularly the ones still in their 20's, think I am <em>insane</em>.  "But dood, yo can get itoonz in like one click!" they say.  Those are the people who will probably buy an e-book.  They can buy it while they're on a bus or something.  Very convenient.
<br> <br>
* In publishing, not only do the big publishers know exactly how their stuff is selling (like what is sold, what is returned, what is stolen, what enters the second-hand market...), but they <em>buy</em> information they don't have so they know what their competitors are doing, too (e.g., a company called Monument Information Resource sells this).  But not just that... publishers also occasionally sample bookstores to get a third view of that data.  And, of course, there's lots of fraternizing between companies because employees switch jobs all the time.  Anyway... they know what's going on, even at the piracy end.  They are <em>very</em> clued into this by now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Publishers have a firm grasp on the real world * .
What they 're hoping is that you wo n't be bothered to go to the used bookstore to get that book .
Or even when it is convenient ( like Amazon Marketplace ) , you are too impatient to wait .
So far , the sales figures seem to bear this out .
Convenience wins .
In music , of course , this revolution has come and gone , but-- I do n't like downloading MP3s .
I buy CDs , a good chunk of those used , either online or at the place down the street .
I think of this as an 'automatic backup ' of sorts .
My friends , particularly the ones still in their 20 's , think I am insane .
" But dood , yo can get itoonz in like one click !
" they say .
Those are the people who will probably buy an e-book .
They can buy it while they 're on a bus or something .
Very convenient .
* In publishing , not only do the big publishers know exactly how their stuff is selling ( like what is sold , what is returned , what is stolen , what enters the second-hand market... ) , but they buy information they do n't have so they know what their competitors are doing , too ( e.g. , a company called Monument Information Resource sells this ) .
But not just that... publishers also occasionally sample bookstores to get a third view of that data .
And , of course , there 's lots of fraternizing between companies because employees switch jobs all the time .
Anyway... they know what 's going on , even at the piracy end .
They are very clued into this by now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Publishers have a firm grasp on the real world*.
What they're hoping is that you won't be bothered to go to the used bookstore to get that book.
Or even when it is convenient (like Amazon Marketplace), you are too impatient to wait.
So far, the sales figures seem to bear this out.
Convenience wins.
In music, of course, this revolution has come and gone, but-- I don't like downloading MP3s.
I buy CDs, a good chunk of those used, either online or at the place down the street.
I think of this as an 'automatic backup' of sorts.
My friends, particularly the ones still in their 20's, think I am insane.
"But dood, yo can get itoonz in like one click!
" they say.
Those are the people who will probably buy an e-book.
They can buy it while they're on a bus or something.
Very convenient.
* In publishing, not only do the big publishers know exactly how their stuff is selling (like what is sold, what is returned, what is stolen, what enters the second-hand market...), but they buy information they don't have so they know what their competitors are doing, too (e.g., a company called Monument Information Resource sells this).
But not just that... publishers also occasionally sample bookstores to get a third view of that data.
And, of course, there's lots of fraternizing between companies because employees switch jobs all the time.
Anyway... they know what's going on, even at the piracy end.
They are very clued into this by now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032150</id>
	<title>Re:This just in...</title>
	<author>Eivind</author>
	<datestamp>1265402220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Absolutely. Books are here to stay.</p><p>His real problem is a different one. With ebooks, many of the people living in the ecosystem BETWEEN the author and the reader are superfluous with ebooks.</p><p>If I like Neil Gaiman, and I read his blog. And he makes a new book, which is a pdf.</p><p>What do the two of us need anyone else for ? I can send him some cash, he can send me the book, end of story.</p><p>That's not an ending that Mr. Murdoch likes though, because it makes him irrelevant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely .
Books are here to stay.His real problem is a different one .
With ebooks , many of the people living in the ecosystem BETWEEN the author and the reader are superfluous with ebooks.If I like Neil Gaiman , and I read his blog .
And he makes a new book , which is a pdf.What do the two of us need anyone else for ?
I can send him some cash , he can send me the book , end of story.That 's not an ending that Mr. Murdoch likes though , because it makes him irrelevant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely.
Books are here to stay.His real problem is a different one.
With ebooks, many of the people living in the ecosystem BETWEEN the author and the reader are superfluous with ebooks.If I like Neil Gaiman, and I read his blog.
And he makes a new book, which is a pdf.What do the two of us need anyone else for ?
I can send him some cash, he can send me the book, end of story.That's not an ending that Mr. Murdoch likes though, because it makes him irrelevant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031030</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031248</id>
	<title>Re:So what he's saying is...</title>
	<author>FatdogHaiku</author>
	<datestamp>1265306220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, you can patronize one of these fine content providers!<br>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_assets\_owned\_by\_News\_Corporation" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_assets\_owned\_by\_News\_Corporation</a> [wikipedia.org] <br>Hurry, he's almost 80, the clock ticks on, and he can't spin that no matter what.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , you can patronize one of these fine content providers !
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List \ _of \ _assets \ _owned \ _by \ _News \ _Corporation [ wikipedia.org ] Hurry , he 's almost 80 , the clock ticks on , and he ca n't spin that no matter what .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, you can patronize one of these fine content providers!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_assets\_owned\_by\_News\_Corporation [wikipedia.org] Hurry, he's almost 80, the clock ticks on, and he can't spin that no matter what.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030786</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032624</id>
	<title>tired of these old fucks whining</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265365860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>seriously, is there anything these old media fucks won't whine about in the internet age? honestly, i cannot wait for the all to die off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>seriously , is there anything these old media fucks wo n't whine about in the internet age ?
honestly , i can not wait for the all to die off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>seriously, is there anything these old media fucks won't whine about in the internet age?
honestly, i cannot wait for the all to die off.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034206</id>
	<title>Evil greedy capitalist</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265383740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just imagine a couple centuries ago some powerful guy saying: "let's not invest in this train stuff, or it will kill our horse drawn carriages market".</p><p>Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love paper books but, damnit, Murdoch is a greedy bastard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just imagine a couple centuries ago some powerful guy saying : " let 's not invest in this train stuff , or it will kill our horse drawn carriages market " .Do n't get me wrong , I absolutely love paper books but , damnit , Murdoch is a greedy bastard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just imagine a couple centuries ago some powerful guy saying: "let's not invest in this train stuff, or it will kill our horse drawn carriages market".Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love paper books but, damnit, Murdoch is a greedy bastard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031396</id>
	<title>Good ol' Murdoch</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1265307180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I actually laughed out loud reading the headline. He thinks he's selling entertainment, but the joke's on him. He's the entertainment.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I actually laughed out loud reading the headline .
He thinks he 's selling entertainment , but the joke 's on him .
He 's the entertainment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I actually laughed out loud reading the headline.
He thinks he's selling entertainment, but the joke's on him.
He's the entertainment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035740</id>
	<title>Re:This just in...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265391900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First of all Mr Gaiman needs someone to edit his book.  Secondly he probably wants to sell it to a wider audience than the readers of his blog, so he's going to need someone to handle marketing.  Thirdly, I (and lots of other people) would much rather own his latest work in nicely bound hardback with a pretty picture on the front.  That means he needs a few people more people to take care of all that.  Sure Mr Gaiman could find and hire all these people on a freelance basis, but that sounds like a bit of pain.   Much easier to have one person taking care of all that stuff, leaving Neil with plenty of time to work on his next book.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First of all Mr Gaiman needs someone to edit his book .
Secondly he probably wants to sell it to a wider audience than the readers of his blog , so he 's going to need someone to handle marketing .
Thirdly , I ( and lots of other people ) would much rather own his latest work in nicely bound hardback with a pretty picture on the front .
That means he needs a few people more people to take care of all that .
Sure Mr Gaiman could find and hire all these people on a freelance basis , but that sounds like a bit of pain .
Much easier to have one person taking care of all that stuff , leaving Neil with plenty of time to work on his next book .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First of all Mr Gaiman needs someone to edit his book.
Secondly he probably wants to sell it to a wider audience than the readers of his blog, so he's going to need someone to handle marketing.
Thirdly, I (and lots of other people) would much rather own his latest work in nicely bound hardback with a pretty picture on the front.
That means he needs a few people more people to take care of all that.
Sure Mr Gaiman could find and hire all these people on a freelance basis, but that sounds like a bit of pain.
Much easier to have one person taking care of all that stuff, leaving Neil with plenty of time to work on his next book.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031642</id>
	<title>Re:Prices</title>
	<author>randallman</author>
	<datestamp>1265309280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're leaving out an important factor;  Volume.  You can't assume that a book must sell at Y to make up for a fixed cost of X.  Like any other market, there exists a price point which maximizes profit and E-READERS ARE CHANGING THAT POINT.  There have been a few reports out recently (I think one was from Amazon) saying that on average, people purchase more books for their e-reader than they did before.  So it makes since that the price can come down if volume is up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're leaving out an important factor ; Volume .
You ca n't assume that a book must sell at Y to make up for a fixed cost of X. Like any other market , there exists a price point which maximizes profit and E-READERS ARE CHANGING THAT POINT .
There have been a few reports out recently ( I think one was from Amazon ) saying that on average , people purchase more books for their e-reader than they did before .
So it makes since that the price can come down if volume is up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're leaving out an important factor;  Volume.
You can't assume that a book must sell at Y to make up for a fixed cost of X.  Like any other market, there exists a price point which maximizes profit and E-READERS ARE CHANGING THAT POINT.
There have been a few reports out recently (I think one was from Amazon) saying that on average, people purchase more books for their e-reader than they did before.
So it makes since that the price can come down if volume is up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031062</id>
	<title>Re:Books vs. E-books</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1265304720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Looking at a screen trying to read an e-book just sucks in my opinion(admittedly I have yet to use the Nook or other such devices). </i></p><p>I'm with you, and still generally prefer dead trees, but e-ink has really changed the experience of reading digital documents.  You're not staring at a screen.  You're staring at a print-out.  You can sit on the couch and read it.  It's still doesn't have the charm of a real book, but everything that sucks about e-books is gone and the nice things (like digital bookmarks and tables of contents and so on) can shine through.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Looking at a screen trying to read an e-book just sucks in my opinion ( admittedly I have yet to use the Nook or other such devices ) .
I 'm with you , and still generally prefer dead trees , but e-ink has really changed the experience of reading digital documents .
You 're not staring at a screen .
You 're staring at a print-out .
You can sit on the couch and read it .
It 's still does n't have the charm of a real book , but everything that sucks about e-books is gone and the nice things ( like digital bookmarks and tables of contents and so on ) can shine through .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looking at a screen trying to read an e-book just sucks in my opinion(admittedly I have yet to use the Nook or other such devices).
I'm with you, and still generally prefer dead trees, but e-ink has really changed the experience of reading digital documents.
You're not staring at a screen.
You're staring at a print-out.
You can sit on the couch and read it.
It's still doesn't have the charm of a real book, but everything that sucks about e-books is gone and the nice things (like digital bookmarks and tables of contents and so on) can shine through.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031336</id>
	<title>Re:9.99 isn't CHEAP for an ebook you don't own</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265306760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The paperback edition will eventually cost less than the 9.99 to 14.99 that Macmillan wants to charge.</p></div><p>Yes, and you'll quite likely find that the price Macmillan wants to charge will drop as the paperbacks come out.</p><p>It's simple economics. Those who want it the day it comes out are generally prepared to pay a price premium for the privilege. Over time, the price drops, and others come in (trade paperback, mass market paperback.) Me? I only buy Terry Pratchett in hardcover; everybody else has to wait until mass market paperback, for various reasons.</p><p>Remember that publishers don't just print the books. They also edit them, lay them out, and market them. There are costs involved in those. Yes, the marginal costs of an ebook are so close to zero as to be almost indistinguishable. But if you have $20,000 in sunk costs, you're losing money unless you can make that back - so if there's a market for (say) 10,000 copies of the book, you need to charge, on <b>average</b>, over $2 a copy just to break even (yes, <b>over</b> two dollars - because there's an opportunity cost in sinking the money into books; if it takes ten years to make back the $20,000, you've lost money, even though on paper you've broken even, because of that opportunity cost - typically charged by banks as interest.)</p><p>So I expect to see the publishers of books take full advantage of the inherent price flexibility of electronic books by pushing the prices up high to start, and gradually dropping them until they're selling for maybe a couple of bucks a pop<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... because that way, they'll make more money, which means they can publish more books for us to read.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The paperback edition will eventually cost less than the 9.99 to 14.99 that Macmillan wants to charge.Yes , and you 'll quite likely find that the price Macmillan wants to charge will drop as the paperbacks come out.It 's simple economics .
Those who want it the day it comes out are generally prepared to pay a price premium for the privilege .
Over time , the price drops , and others come in ( trade paperback , mass market paperback .
) Me ?
I only buy Terry Pratchett in hardcover ; everybody else has to wait until mass market paperback , for various reasons.Remember that publishers do n't just print the books .
They also edit them , lay them out , and market them .
There are costs involved in those .
Yes , the marginal costs of an ebook are so close to zero as to be almost indistinguishable .
But if you have $ 20,000 in sunk costs , you 're losing money unless you can make that back - so if there 's a market for ( say ) 10,000 copies of the book , you need to charge , on average , over $ 2 a copy just to break even ( yes , over two dollars - because there 's an opportunity cost in sinking the money into books ; if it takes ten years to make back the $ 20,000 , you 've lost money , even though on paper you 've broken even , because of that opportunity cost - typically charged by banks as interest .
) So I expect to see the publishers of books take full advantage of the inherent price flexibility of electronic books by pushing the prices up high to start , and gradually dropping them until they 're selling for maybe a couple of bucks a pop ... because that way , they 'll make more money , which means they can publish more books for us to read .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The paperback edition will eventually cost less than the 9.99 to 14.99 that Macmillan wants to charge.Yes, and you'll quite likely find that the price Macmillan wants to charge will drop as the paperbacks come out.It's simple economics.
Those who want it the day it comes out are generally prepared to pay a price premium for the privilege.
Over time, the price drops, and others come in (trade paperback, mass market paperback.
) Me?
I only buy Terry Pratchett in hardcover; everybody else has to wait until mass market paperback, for various reasons.Remember that publishers don't just print the books.
They also edit them, lay them out, and market them.
There are costs involved in those.
Yes, the marginal costs of an ebook are so close to zero as to be almost indistinguishable.
But if you have $20,000 in sunk costs, you're losing money unless you can make that back - so if there's a market for (say) 10,000 copies of the book, you need to charge, on average, over $2 a copy just to break even (yes, over two dollars - because there's an opportunity cost in sinking the money into books; if it takes ten years to make back the $20,000, you've lost money, even though on paper you've broken even, because of that opportunity cost - typically charged by banks as interest.
)So I expect to see the publishers of books take full advantage of the inherent price flexibility of electronic books by pushing the prices up high to start, and gradually dropping them until they're selling for maybe a couple of bucks a pop ... because that way, they'll make more money, which means they can publish more books for us to read.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034308</id>
	<title>what a moron</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1265384520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What a f*cken moron that guy is, really<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...whining about not having to spend so much money to print on paper and cause pollution world wide, he should be shot. Poor buddy can't afford another rolls, so let's complain instead of making proper decision making and cutting budget in places where<br>it would benefit his company (his large yearly bonus for example)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What a f * cken moron that guy is , really ...whining about not having to spend so much money to print on paper and cause pollution world wide , he should be shot .
Poor buddy ca n't afford another rolls , so let 's complain instead of making proper decision making and cutting budget in places whereit would benefit his company ( his large yearly bonus for example )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a f*cken moron that guy is, really ...whining about not having to spend so much money to print on paper and cause pollution world wide, he should be shot.
Poor buddy can't afford another rolls, so let's complain instead of making proper decision making and cutting budget in places whereit would benefit his company (his large yearly bonus for example)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882</id>
	<title>Books vs. E-books</title>
	<author>xerio</author>
	<datestamp>1265303340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I love books. I much prefer to read a dead-tree book than an e-book. There's just something I love about sitting on a couch with a book in my hands turning the pages as I read. It doesn't matter if it's a technical book, fiction, nonfiction, or a textbook of some sort. I prefer the actual thing. Looking at a screen trying to read an e-book just sucks in my opinion(admittedly I have yet to use the Nook or other such devices).
<br> <br>
That said. I can't afford the dead-tree versions of alot of the books I want. So I have to resort to e-books. The people like Murdoch need to catch up with the times. Amazon makes it to where I can afford to read the books I love. As far as I'm concerned, they get my business because they tend to do things for the customers from what I've seen, not their wallets.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I love books .
I much prefer to read a dead-tree book than an e-book .
There 's just something I love about sitting on a couch with a book in my hands turning the pages as I read .
It does n't matter if it 's a technical book , fiction , nonfiction , or a textbook of some sort .
I prefer the actual thing .
Looking at a screen trying to read an e-book just sucks in my opinion ( admittedly I have yet to use the Nook or other such devices ) .
That said .
I ca n't afford the dead-tree versions of alot of the books I want .
So I have to resort to e-books .
The people like Murdoch need to catch up with the times .
Amazon makes it to where I can afford to read the books I love .
As far as I 'm concerned , they get my business because they tend to do things for the customers from what I 've seen , not their wallets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love books.
I much prefer to read a dead-tree book than an e-book.
There's just something I love about sitting on a couch with a book in my hands turning the pages as I read.
It doesn't matter if it's a technical book, fiction, nonfiction, or a textbook of some sort.
I prefer the actual thing.
Looking at a screen trying to read an e-book just sucks in my opinion(admittedly I have yet to use the Nook or other such devices).
That said.
I can't afford the dead-tree versions of alot of the books I want.
So I have to resort to e-books.
The people like Murdoch need to catch up with the times.
Amazon makes it to where I can afford to read the books I love.
As far as I'm concerned, they get my business because they tend to do things for the customers from what I've seen, not their wallets.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031576</id>
	<title>Perhaps mentioned before</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265308560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sure someone has mentioned this before- but I'm too lazy to read all 150 comments.

But to keep in line with Murdochs thinking here, then maybe we should go back to Horse and Buggy since the Motor Vehicle put them out of service. In fact lets go back mail order catalogs and banish the internets e-commerce, since those have been put out of business.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure someone has mentioned this before- but I 'm too lazy to read all 150 comments .
But to keep in line with Murdochs thinking here , then maybe we should go back to Horse and Buggy since the Motor Vehicle put them out of service .
In fact lets go back mail order catalogs and banish the internets e-commerce , since those have been put out of business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure someone has mentioned this before- but I'm too lazy to read all 150 comments.
But to keep in line with Murdochs thinking here, then maybe we should go back to Horse and Buggy since the Motor Vehicle put them out of service.
In fact lets go back mail order catalogs and banish the internets e-commerce, since those have been put out of business.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031082</id>
	<title>Getting books published......</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265304900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wouldn't have an issue with them making a bigger profit on items, if they actually took the time to look for new authors.  Instead we have authors who talk about how hard it was to get someone to even read their work, who then go on to be best sellers multiple times over.  Jim Butcher comes to mind, he has two series that I know of "Dresden Files" and "Codex of Alera", I enjoyed both series of books.  But his story is that he had to go to multiple conventions, meeting personally with agents over many years to get noticed.  And after all that, the only reason they considered him was because he had three books ready to go.</p><p>They are in the business of publishing books, and yes I understand that they need to filter out stuff.  But when someone can be overlooked for years and then go on to be a best seller multiple times over......and they still complain about profits.  Well that tells me they don't WANT to find new material to publish for profit, they WANT to sell what they already have access to and cut out the part where they have to actually find new material, edit, revise, advertise, and publish.</p><p>Im sure those existing authors they continue to draw on are realizing that they are worth a whole lot more to their publishers when the publishers never look for new material/authors, and probably cutting into their profits with shiny new contracts.  I doubt it even made them consider changing their ways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't have an issue with them making a bigger profit on items , if they actually took the time to look for new authors .
Instead we have authors who talk about how hard it was to get someone to even read their work , who then go on to be best sellers multiple times over .
Jim Butcher comes to mind , he has two series that I know of " Dresden Files " and " Codex of Alera " , I enjoyed both series of books .
But his story is that he had to go to multiple conventions , meeting personally with agents over many years to get noticed .
And after all that , the only reason they considered him was because he had three books ready to go.They are in the business of publishing books , and yes I understand that they need to filter out stuff .
But when someone can be overlooked for years and then go on to be a best seller multiple times over......and they still complain about profits .
Well that tells me they do n't WANT to find new material to publish for profit , they WANT to sell what they already have access to and cut out the part where they have to actually find new material , edit , revise , advertise , and publish.Im sure those existing authors they continue to draw on are realizing that they are worth a whole lot more to their publishers when the publishers never look for new material/authors , and probably cutting into their profits with shiny new contracts .
I doubt it even made them consider changing their ways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't have an issue with them making a bigger profit on items, if they actually took the time to look for new authors.
Instead we have authors who talk about how hard it was to get someone to even read their work, who then go on to be best sellers multiple times over.
Jim Butcher comes to mind, he has two series that I know of "Dresden Files" and "Codex of Alera", I enjoyed both series of books.
But his story is that he had to go to multiple conventions, meeting personally with agents over many years to get noticed.
And after all that, the only reason they considered him was because he had three books ready to go.They are in the business of publishing books, and yes I understand that they need to filter out stuff.
But when someone can be overlooked for years and then go on to be a best seller multiple times over......and they still complain about profits.
Well that tells me they don't WANT to find new material to publish for profit, they WANT to sell what they already have access to and cut out the part where they have to actually find new material, edit, revise, advertise, and publish.Im sure those existing authors they continue to draw on are realizing that they are worth a whole lot more to their publishers when the publishers never look for new material/authors, and probably cutting into their profits with shiny new contracts.
I doubt it even made them consider changing their ways.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033090</id>
	<title>Re:This just in...</title>
	<author>Solaris4Ever</author>
	<datestamp>1265372580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For movies, in many cases the production has
been beyond the scope of small organizations or
individuals, although even this is changing.  But
for music, and even more for books, anyone with
talent and some fairly modest equipment can produce
and can electronically distribute.

I would think that there's a real opening for a
new class of agents, that know how to wheel and
deal with Amazon, B&amp;N, and other online distributors.  Given that, the traditional
publishers and distributors \_ought\_ to die IMO,
and make room for a more efficient system that
does less gatekeeping on the many authors and
artists with real talent but little name
recognition; and one that, at least once they
gain some recognition, puts a lot more of the
profits in the hands of the creator (and the
agent that directly serves them) rather than
in the hands of traditional physical publishers
that just don't add enough value to justify their
costs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For movies , in many cases the production has been beyond the scope of small organizations or individuals , although even this is changing .
But for music , and even more for books , anyone with talent and some fairly modest equipment can produce and can electronically distribute .
I would think that there 's a real opening for a new class of agents , that know how to wheel and deal with Amazon , B&amp;N , and other online distributors .
Given that , the traditional publishers and distributors \ _ought \ _ to die IMO , and make room for a more efficient system that does less gatekeeping on the many authors and artists with real talent but little name recognition ; and one that , at least once they gain some recognition , puts a lot more of the profits in the hands of the creator ( and the agent that directly serves them ) rather than in the hands of traditional physical publishers that just do n't add enough value to justify their costs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For movies, in many cases the production has
been beyond the scope of small organizations or
individuals, although even this is changing.
But
for music, and even more for books, anyone with
talent and some fairly modest equipment can produce
and can electronically distribute.
I would think that there's a real opening for a
new class of agents, that know how to wheel and
deal with Amazon, B&amp;N, and other online distributors.
Given that, the traditional
publishers and distributors \_ought\_ to die IMO,
and make room for a more efficient system that
does less gatekeeping on the many authors and
artists with real talent but little name
recognition; and one that, at least once they
gain some recognition, puts a lot more of the
profits in the hands of the creator (and the
agent that directly serves them) rather than
in the hands of traditional physical publishers
that just don't add enough value to justify their
costs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031030</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030790</id>
	<title>Silly Rupert</title>
	<author>Dracos</author>
	<datestamp>1265302620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He thinks everything exists for the sole purpose of carrying a price tag.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He thinks everything exists for the sole purpose of carrying a price tag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He thinks everything exists for the sole purpose of carrying a price tag.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031096</id>
	<title>Re:Books vs. E-books</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1265305020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have books at home which I have owned for 40 years and would love to own for another 40 but the fact is that they are falling to bits. An ebook (without DRM) would last a lot longer. And a good book reader   would offset the loss of the physical media for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have books at home which I have owned for 40 years and would love to own for another 40 but the fact is that they are falling to bits .
An ebook ( without DRM ) would last a lot longer .
And a good book reader would offset the loss of the physical media for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have books at home which I have owned for 40 years and would love to own for another 40 but the fact is that they are falling to bits.
An ebook (without DRM) would last a lot longer.
And a good book reader   would offset the loss of the physical media for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035938</id>
	<title>Re:This just in...</title>
	<author>david\_thornley</author>
	<datestamp>1265392560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
That works if I know the author, expect the finished book to be worth the money, are on the contact list at that time, and have some confidence in getting the whole book.
</p><p>
It doesn't work for finding out about an author several books later, waiting for reviews before purchasing, discovering a previously unknown author, delaying a purchase until I have more money, or if I have reason to think the quality of the first chapter might not be representative.  (For a murder mystery, for example, I can't judge the quality of the book until I've read the whole thing.)
</p><p>
It's also a whole lot more speculative.  One role of a publisher is to minimize risk for author and reader.  The reader is assured of getting something the publisher thought publishable, and which probably isn't a waste of time.  The author knows that somebody thinks the book salable before getting into the less creative parts of the business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That works if I know the author , expect the finished book to be worth the money , are on the contact list at that time , and have some confidence in getting the whole book .
It does n't work for finding out about an author several books later , waiting for reviews before purchasing , discovering a previously unknown author , delaying a purchase until I have more money , or if I have reason to think the quality of the first chapter might not be representative .
( For a murder mystery , for example , I ca n't judge the quality of the book until I 've read the whole thing .
) It 's also a whole lot more speculative .
One role of a publisher is to minimize risk for author and reader .
The reader is assured of getting something the publisher thought publishable , and which probably is n't a waste of time .
The author knows that somebody thinks the book salable before getting into the less creative parts of the business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
That works if I know the author, expect the finished book to be worth the money, are on the contact list at that time, and have some confidence in getting the whole book.
It doesn't work for finding out about an author several books later, waiting for reviews before purchasing, discovering a previously unknown author, delaying a purchase until I have more money, or if I have reason to think the quality of the first chapter might not be representative.
(For a murder mystery, for example, I can't judge the quality of the book until I've read the whole thing.
)

It's also a whole lot more speculative.
One role of a publisher is to minimize risk for author and reader.
The reader is assured of getting something the publisher thought publishable, and which probably isn't a waste of time.
The author knows that somebody thinks the book salable before getting into the less creative parts of the business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032102</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035858</id>
	<title>Re:Books vs. E-books</title>
	<author>ender-</author>
	<datestamp>1265392260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is one of the reasons I haven't gotten a Nook [or Kindle, but I think I'd prefer the Nook]. Now I will always prefer a good hard-cover book. I love having books on my shelf.</p><p>However I have been using the B&amp;N book software and Stanza on my iPhone. In the last 2 months I've read about 8 full length novels on my phone. While it's not quite a nice as a real book and it does require more 'page turns', it doesn't seem to bother my eyes much at all. I've set it for a black background with white text, turn the brightness down a bit and I have no problems. And I ALWAYS have my phone with me. So if I'm waiting in line for something or waiting at the doctor's office, boom I've got my book with me. My worry is that the ebooks will become just another device that I don't carry around with me and thus don't get used as much as it should.</p><p>That said, I'm GLAD of the explosion of interest in ebooks, and hope the pricing gets settled closer to where it should be. Which will probably happen in time as publishers like Murdoch go out of business when the authors realize they only need enough of a middleman to handle editing, layout and scanning. Even scanning is optional if you write the book on a computer in the first place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is one of the reasons I have n't gotten a Nook [ or Kindle , but I think I 'd prefer the Nook ] .
Now I will always prefer a good hard-cover book .
I love having books on my shelf.However I have been using the B&amp;N book software and Stanza on my iPhone .
In the last 2 months I 've read about 8 full length novels on my phone .
While it 's not quite a nice as a real book and it does require more 'page turns ' , it does n't seem to bother my eyes much at all .
I 've set it for a black background with white text , turn the brightness down a bit and I have no problems .
And I ALWAYS have my phone with me .
So if I 'm waiting in line for something or waiting at the doctor 's office , boom I 've got my book with me .
My worry is that the ebooks will become just another device that I do n't carry around with me and thus do n't get used as much as it should.That said , I 'm GLAD of the explosion of interest in ebooks , and hope the pricing gets settled closer to where it should be .
Which will probably happen in time as publishers like Murdoch go out of business when the authors realize they only need enough of a middleman to handle editing , layout and scanning .
Even scanning is optional if you write the book on a computer in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is one of the reasons I haven't gotten a Nook [or Kindle, but I think I'd prefer the Nook].
Now I will always prefer a good hard-cover book.
I love having books on my shelf.However I have been using the B&amp;N book software and Stanza on my iPhone.
In the last 2 months I've read about 8 full length novels on my phone.
While it's not quite a nice as a real book and it does require more 'page turns', it doesn't seem to bother my eyes much at all.
I've set it for a black background with white text, turn the brightness down a bit and I have no problems.
And I ALWAYS have my phone with me.
So if I'm waiting in line for something or waiting at the doctor's office, boom I've got my book with me.
My worry is that the ebooks will become just another device that I don't carry around with me and thus don't get used as much as it should.That said, I'm GLAD of the explosion of interest in ebooks, and hope the pricing gets settled closer to where it should be.
Which will probably happen in time as publishers like Murdoch go out of business when the authors realize they only need enough of a middleman to handle editing, layout and scanning.
Even scanning is optional if you write the book on a computer in the first place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031998</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030960</id>
	<title>Doubt It!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265304000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quite frankly, I enjoy paper. The smell makes me happy.<br>http://www.novoparatus.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Quite frankly , I enjoy paper .
The smell makes me happy.http : //www.novoparatus.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quite frankly, I enjoy paper.
The smell makes me happy.http://www.novoparatus.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031976</id>
	<title>Re:So what he's saying is...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265313000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe you can subscribe to the RSS feed of his blog? Or become a follower of his twitter account?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe you can subscribe to the RSS feed of his blog ?
Or become a follower of his twitter account ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe you can subscribe to the RSS feed of his blog?
Or become a follower of his twitter account?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030786</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031500</id>
	<title>Re:Silly Rupert</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1265308140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Including his mom?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;))</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Including his mom ?
; ) )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Including his mom?
;))</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31036048</id>
	<title>Re:Books vs. E-books</title>
	<author>ThousandStars</author>
	<datestamp>1265392920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>I can't afford the dead-tree versions of alot of the books I want.</i>

<p>Have you thought about buying them used, either from outfits like <a href="http://www.abebooks.com/" title="abebooks.com">Abebooks</a> [abebooks.com] or Amazon's second-hand market? I ask because those sources are where a lot of my older books come from -- and I <a href="http://jseliger.com/" title="jseliger.com">read a lot</a> [jseliger.com] of them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't afford the dead-tree versions of alot of the books I want .
Have you thought about buying them used , either from outfits like Abebooks [ abebooks.com ] or Amazon 's second-hand market ?
I ask because those sources are where a lot of my older books come from -- and I read a lot [ jseliger.com ] of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't afford the dead-tree versions of alot of the books I want.
Have you thought about buying them used, either from outfits like Abebooks [abebooks.com] or Amazon's second-hand market?
I ask because those sources are where a lot of my older books come from -- and I read a lot [jseliger.com] of them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034886</id>
	<title>Re:This just in...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265387820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If I like Neil Gaiman, and I read his blog. And he makes a new book, which is a pdf.</p><p>What do the two of us need anyone else for ? I can send him some cash, he can send me the book, end of story.</p><p>That's not an ending that Mr. Murdoch likes though, because it makes him irrelevant.</p></div><p>This model only works for well know authors who want to deal with the hassle of running their own business however. How do new authors get themselves known? Who creates the nicely formatted pdf/ePub/etc file? Who builds the author's website? Who handles the financial transactions? Or, are you saying that the only authors worth reading are folks like Gaiman, Doctorow and Scalzi...</p><p>There is a lot of room for folks between authors and readers to do useful work and get paid for it. The book publishing industry is just facing the same tipping point that the music industry failed at - figuring out how to make sure that it is the \_same\_ group of people getting paid. I don't think Murdoch is even thinking about the model you proposed, he is just still trying to figure out how to remain in the loop and get paid.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I like Neil Gaiman , and I read his blog .
And he makes a new book , which is a pdf.What do the two of us need anyone else for ?
I can send him some cash , he can send me the book , end of story.That 's not an ending that Mr. Murdoch likes though , because it makes him irrelevant.This model only works for well know authors who want to deal with the hassle of running their own business however .
How do new authors get themselves known ?
Who creates the nicely formatted pdf/ePub/etc file ?
Who builds the author 's website ?
Who handles the financial transactions ?
Or , are you saying that the only authors worth reading are folks like Gaiman , Doctorow and Scalzi...There is a lot of room for folks between authors and readers to do useful work and get paid for it .
The book publishing industry is just facing the same tipping point that the music industry failed at - figuring out how to make sure that it is the \ _same \ _ group of people getting paid .
I do n't think Murdoch is even thinking about the model you proposed , he is just still trying to figure out how to remain in the loop and get paid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I like Neil Gaiman, and I read his blog.
And he makes a new book, which is a pdf.What do the two of us need anyone else for ?
I can send him some cash, he can send me the book, end of story.That's not an ending that Mr. Murdoch likes though, because it makes him irrelevant.This model only works for well know authors who want to deal with the hassle of running their own business however.
How do new authors get themselves known?
Who creates the nicely formatted pdf/ePub/etc file?
Who builds the author's website?
Who handles the financial transactions?
Or, are you saying that the only authors worth reading are folks like Gaiman, Doctorow and Scalzi...There is a lot of room for folks between authors and readers to do useful work and get paid for it.
The book publishing industry is just facing the same tipping point that the music industry failed at - figuring out how to make sure that it is the \_same\_ group of people getting paid.
I don't think Murdoch is even thinking about the model you proposed, he is just still trying to figure out how to remain in the loop and get paid.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031202</id>
	<title>Re:9.99 isn't CHEAP for an ebook you don't own</title>
	<author>masmullin</author>
	<datestamp>1265305860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>tru dat... there needs to be<br>1) removal of DRM - I want to read my books on whatever device I need to in 15 years<br>2) some way of buying selling used copies.</p><p>yes, I realize that 1 doesn't jive with 2.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>tru dat... there needs to be1 ) removal of DRM - I want to read my books on whatever device I need to in 15 years2 ) some way of buying selling used copies.yes , I realize that 1 does n't jive with 2 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>tru dat... there needs to be1) removal of DRM - I want to read my books on whatever device I need to in 15 years2) some way of buying selling used copies.yes, I realize that 1 doesn't jive with 2.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032232</id>
	<title>to quote a fox show</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265360640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm .
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm.
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031024</id>
	<title>Duh!</title>
	<author>headkase</author>
	<datestamp>1265304420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He forgets the golden rule of capitalism!  I don't give a shit about the retailers.  I want competitively priced goods.  If I can get them from Amazon for cheap and in a format I'm happy with, well, bu-bye Murdock-with-your-head-up-your-ass.  Good riddance.  You are not <b>entitled</b> to a living, change.</htmltext>
<tokenext>He forgets the golden rule of capitalism !
I do n't give a shit about the retailers .
I want competitively priced goods .
If I can get them from Amazon for cheap and in a format I 'm happy with , well , bu-bye Murdock-with-your-head-up-your-ass .
Good riddance .
You are not entitled to a living , change .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He forgets the golden rule of capitalism!
I don't give a shit about the retailers.
I want competitively priced goods.
If I can get them from Amazon for cheap and in a format I'm happy with, well, bu-bye Murdock-with-your-head-up-your-ass.
Good riddance.
You are not entitled to a living, change.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031624</id>
	<title>Re:Okay</title>
	<author>cetialphav</author>
	<datestamp>1265309100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How is this NOT price fixing?</p></div><p>It is not price fixing when Amazon and Rupert Murdoch decide on a good price for Amazon to resell Murdoch's goods.  That is just basic business and not at all illegal.</p><p>Price fixing would be when Amazon, Borders, and Barnes &amp; Noble collude to sell things at a set price.  Now it may just work out that Murdoch is able to negotiate the same deal with all the retailers, but there are very few companies that have that kind of clout, and he is probably not one of them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How is this NOT price fixing ? It is not price fixing when Amazon and Rupert Murdoch decide on a good price for Amazon to resell Murdoch 's goods .
That is just basic business and not at all illegal.Price fixing would be when Amazon , Borders , and Barnes &amp; Noble collude to sell things at a set price .
Now it may just work out that Murdoch is able to negotiate the same deal with all the retailers , but there are very few companies that have that kind of clout , and he is probably not one of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is this NOT price fixing?It is not price fixing when Amazon and Rupert Murdoch decide on a good price for Amazon to resell Murdoch's goods.
That is just basic business and not at all illegal.Price fixing would be when Amazon, Borders, and Barnes &amp; Noble collude to sell things at a set price.
Now it may just work out that Murdoch is able to negotiate the same deal with all the retailers, but there are very few companies that have that kind of clout, and he is probably not one of them.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031044</id>
	<title>They have to be cheaper</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265304540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At the moment E-Books are not cheaper then paper backs and some times hard covers are cheaper then E-Books.</p><p>And the cost to make an E-Book and sending it to the consumer is cheaper then printing, shipping and storing a book, and then shipping it to the consumer.<br>So E-Books should be cheaper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At the moment E-Books are not cheaper then paper backs and some times hard covers are cheaper then E-Books.And the cost to make an E-Book and sending it to the consumer is cheaper then printing , shipping and storing a book , and then shipping it to the consumer.So E-Books should be cheaper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the moment E-Books are not cheaper then paper backs and some times hard covers are cheaper then E-Books.And the cost to make an E-Book and sending it to the consumer is cheaper then printing, shipping and storing a book, and then shipping it to the consumer.So E-Books should be cheaper.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031030</id>
	<title>Re:This just in...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265304480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To make it worse, he has no excuse. The music industry does, they were the first to miss the boat on digital content. The movie industry should have caught on, but somehow didn't. The publishers should really have been able to figure it out; they had fair warning and opportunity and, seemingly, just couldn't connect the dots.</p><p>Big Content screwed up and is on the way out no matter how much they complain. Books are absolutely here to stay, but the profit model is shifting. Hopefully the huge economies of scale afforded by e-Books will allow the authors to profit more than under the current model. In any case, Amazon is sure to come out on top for the near future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To make it worse , he has no excuse .
The music industry does , they were the first to miss the boat on digital content .
The movie industry should have caught on , but somehow did n't .
The publishers should really have been able to figure it out ; they had fair warning and opportunity and , seemingly , just could n't connect the dots.Big Content screwed up and is on the way out no matter how much they complain .
Books are absolutely here to stay , but the profit model is shifting .
Hopefully the huge economies of scale afforded by e-Books will allow the authors to profit more than under the current model .
In any case , Amazon is sure to come out on top for the near future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To make it worse, he has no excuse.
The music industry does, they were the first to miss the boat on digital content.
The movie industry should have caught on, but somehow didn't.
The publishers should really have been able to figure it out; they had fair warning and opportunity and, seemingly, just couldn't connect the dots.Big Content screwed up and is on the way out no matter how much they complain.
Books are absolutely here to stay, but the profit model is shifting.
Hopefully the huge economies of scale afforded by e-Books will allow the authors to profit more than under the current model.
In any case, Amazon is sure to come out on top for the near future.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030776</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031638</id>
	<title>Re:Okay</title>
	<author>ultramk</author>
	<datestamp>1265309220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because it's not a fungible resource. i.e. steel, gasoline, standardized screws, and the like.</p><p>A particular book is unique, it's not interchangeable with any other book from another publisher. (yes exceptions like, say, the bible or Shakespeare exist, but those are unusual) Because only one company holds the rights to sell say, the new Tom Clancy in the US, there's nobody to price fix with. The publisher can charge whatever they want, and if you don't like it, too bad. Read something else. Borrow it from the library.</p><p>Anti competitive? how? there's only one source for this product. Who are you competing with?</p><p>I can sense you're going to respond with a car analogy, so let me nip that in the bud: cars within a certain market segment, are functionally interchangeable and thus subject to price fixing laws. i.e. a toyota camry, honda accord, nissan altima, all fulfill the same role. They aren't identical obviously, but in the eyes of the law they are close enough to make them equivalent. The purpose of a Tom Clancy book, however, is to fill you with the overly technical military jargon of Mr Tom Clancy. A Dan Brown novel will not suffice, and is not interchangeable. i.e. not fungible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because it 's not a fungible resource .
i.e. steel , gasoline , standardized screws , and the like.A particular book is unique , it 's not interchangeable with any other book from another publisher .
( yes exceptions like , say , the bible or Shakespeare exist , but those are unusual ) Because only one company holds the rights to sell say , the new Tom Clancy in the US , there 's nobody to price fix with .
The publisher can charge whatever they want , and if you do n't like it , too bad .
Read something else .
Borrow it from the library.Anti competitive ?
how ? there 's only one source for this product .
Who are you competing with ? I can sense you 're going to respond with a car analogy , so let me nip that in the bud : cars within a certain market segment , are functionally interchangeable and thus subject to price fixing laws .
i.e. a toyota camry , honda accord , nissan altima , all fulfill the same role .
They are n't identical obviously , but in the eyes of the law they are close enough to make them equivalent .
The purpose of a Tom Clancy book , however , is to fill you with the overly technical military jargon of Mr Tom Clancy .
A Dan Brown novel will not suffice , and is not interchangeable .
i.e. not fungible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because it's not a fungible resource.
i.e. steel, gasoline, standardized screws, and the like.A particular book is unique, it's not interchangeable with any other book from another publisher.
(yes exceptions like, say, the bible or Shakespeare exist, but those are unusual) Because only one company holds the rights to sell say, the new Tom Clancy in the US, there's nobody to price fix with.
The publisher can charge whatever they want, and if you don't like it, too bad.
Read something else.
Borrow it from the library.Anti competitive?
how? there's only one source for this product.
Who are you competing with?I can sense you're going to respond with a car analogy, so let me nip that in the bud: cars within a certain market segment, are functionally interchangeable and thus subject to price fixing laws.
i.e. a toyota camry, honda accord, nissan altima, all fulfill the same role.
They aren't identical obviously, but in the eyes of the law they are close enough to make them equivalent.
The purpose of a Tom Clancy book, however, is to fill you with the overly technical military jargon of Mr Tom Clancy.
A Dan Brown novel will not suffice, and is not interchangeable.
i.e. not fungible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031590</id>
	<title>Not a New Concept</title>
	<author>coppro</author>
	<datestamp>1265308680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is not a new concept, and it's certainly not fatal to the book:

<ul>
<li>The Encyclopedia Britannica costs $70/a for an online subscription. It costs $1300 for a paper copy. People still buy the paper copy.</li><li>A hardcover book costs 2-4 times as much as the paperback. People still buy the hardcover.</li><li>Public libraries exist. People still buy books.</li></ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not a new concept , and it 's certainly not fatal to the book : The Encyclopedia Britannica costs $ 70/a for an online subscription .
It costs $ 1300 for a paper copy .
People still buy the paper copy.A hardcover book costs 2-4 times as much as the paperback .
People still buy the hardcover.Public libraries exist .
People still buy books .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not a new concept, and it's certainly not fatal to the book:


The Encyclopedia Britannica costs $70/a for an online subscription.
It costs $1300 for a paper copy.
People still buy the paper copy.A hardcover book costs 2-4 times as much as the paperback.
People still buy the hardcover.Public libraries exist.
People still buy books.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031544</id>
	<title>Re:Prices</title>
	<author>ultramk</author>
	<datestamp>1265308380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I manage a (very) small publishing company, and the parent post is entirely correct.</p><p>Actual printing, storage and shipping is less than one quarter the wholesale cost of the book. Author's advance, researchers, royalties, marketing, editing, illustration and production costs are the rest. These costs don't disappear just because there's no physical book.</p><p>Now, if you have a super mega hyper bestseller, then yes: aside from royalties, every one of those costs gets spread over the millions of copies you're not having to ship physically. Unfortunately, super mega hyper bestsellers do not grow on trees. More common are the books that just barely make enough money to keep us in business. Almost as common are books that bleed money and end up in a bulk recycler by the thousands.</p><p>We're looking at going the ebook route, but honestly we're not sure if we could even stay in business at $10 or even $15 retail. (our most profitable book is in a specialty category, 700+ pages for $35.95 retail)</p><p>This isn't the music business, trust me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I manage a ( very ) small publishing company , and the parent post is entirely correct.Actual printing , storage and shipping is less than one quarter the wholesale cost of the book .
Author 's advance , researchers , royalties , marketing , editing , illustration and production costs are the rest .
These costs do n't disappear just because there 's no physical book.Now , if you have a super mega hyper bestseller , then yes : aside from royalties , every one of those costs gets spread over the millions of copies you 're not having to ship physically .
Unfortunately , super mega hyper bestsellers do not grow on trees .
More common are the books that just barely make enough money to keep us in business .
Almost as common are books that bleed money and end up in a bulk recycler by the thousands.We 're looking at going the ebook route , but honestly we 're not sure if we could even stay in business at $ 10 or even $ 15 retail .
( our most profitable book is in a specialty category , 700 + pages for $ 35.95 retail ) This is n't the music business , trust me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I manage a (very) small publishing company, and the parent post is entirely correct.Actual printing, storage and shipping is less than one quarter the wholesale cost of the book.
Author's advance, researchers, royalties, marketing, editing, illustration and production costs are the rest.
These costs don't disappear just because there's no physical book.Now, if you have a super mega hyper bestseller, then yes: aside from royalties, every one of those costs gets spread over the millions of copies you're not having to ship physically.
Unfortunately, super mega hyper bestsellers do not grow on trees.
More common are the books that just barely make enough money to keep us in business.
Almost as common are books that bleed money and end up in a bulk recycler by the thousands.We're looking at going the ebook route, but honestly we're not sure if we could even stay in business at $10 or even $15 retail.
(our most profitable book is in a specialty category, 700+ pages for $35.95 retail)This isn't the music business, trust me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031120</id>
	<title>Okay</title>
	<author>Auckerman</author>
	<datestamp>1265305200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is this NOT price fixing?  They use licensing semantics to do an end run around the idea, but in the end it's price fixing.  Last I heard, anti competitive practices like that are illegal in the United States.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is this NOT price fixing ?
They use licensing semantics to do an end run around the idea , but in the end it 's price fixing .
Last I heard , anti competitive practices like that are illegal in the United States .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is this NOT price fixing?
They use licensing semantics to do an end run around the idea, but in the end it's price fixing.
Last I heard, anti competitive practices like that are illegal in the United States.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030786</id>
	<title>So what he's saying is...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265302560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If a new product comes along that is cheaper and more desired by consumers the old product becomes a dead market?  What fascinating insight!  How can I pay money to see more news from this "Murdoch" guy?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If a new product comes along that is cheaper and more desired by consumers the old product becomes a dead market ?
What fascinating insight !
How can I pay money to see more news from this " Murdoch " guy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If a new product comes along that is cheaper and more desired by consumers the old product becomes a dead market?
What fascinating insight!
How can I pay money to see more news from this "Murdoch" guy?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031568</id>
	<title>Re:Books vs. E-books</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265308500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I love books. I much prefer to read a dead-tree book than an e-book. There's just something I love about sitting on a couch with a book in my hands turning the pages as I read.</p></div></blockquote><p>That's funny. I prefer my Kindle for the <em>exact</em> same reason. There's just something I love about sitting on a recliner with my Kindle in my hands, turning the pages as I read, without having to worry about holding down the pages so that the pages don't close on me or damaging the spines of the books permanently by opening up the pages too much.</p><p>I'd rather very much focus on the book and its content, as I can with Kindle (or any ebook reader with reflective screen, really), not how I am struggling with its physical manifestation.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I love books .
I much prefer to read a dead-tree book than an e-book .
There 's just something I love about sitting on a couch with a book in my hands turning the pages as I read.That 's funny .
I prefer my Kindle for the exact same reason .
There 's just something I love about sitting on a recliner with my Kindle in my hands , turning the pages as I read , without having to worry about holding down the pages so that the pages do n't close on me or damaging the spines of the books permanently by opening up the pages too much.I 'd rather very much focus on the book and its content , as I can with Kindle ( or any ebook reader with reflective screen , really ) , not how I am struggling with its physical manifestation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love books.
I much prefer to read a dead-tree book than an e-book.
There's just something I love about sitting on a couch with a book in my hands turning the pages as I read.That's funny.
I prefer my Kindle for the exact same reason.
There's just something I love about sitting on a recliner with my Kindle in my hands, turning the pages as I read, without having to worry about holding down the pages so that the pages don't close on me or damaging the spines of the books permanently by opening up the pages too much.I'd rather very much focus on the book and its content, as I can with Kindle (or any ebook reader with reflective screen, really), not how I am struggling with its physical manifestation.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033562</id>
	<title>In other words</title>
	<author>crimperman</author>
	<datestamp>1265378760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having creamed a vast fortune off us by re-selling other people's content (often at a considerable mark-up and with unfair practices), Murdoch is <em>again</em> whining that the world is changing and he can't see how to work the new one to his advantage.</p><p>Well guess what? That's one of the reasons it's changing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having creamed a vast fortune off us by re-selling other people 's content ( often at a considerable mark-up and with unfair practices ) , Murdoch is again whining that the world is changing and he ca n't see how to work the new one to his advantage.Well guess what ?
That 's one of the reasons it 's changing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having creamed a vast fortune off us by re-selling other people's content (often at a considerable mark-up and with unfair practices), Murdoch is again whining that the world is changing and he can't see how to work the new one to his advantage.Well guess what?
That's one of the reasons it's changing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033550</id>
	<title>Beach</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265378640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An e-book won't survive the beach</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An e-book wo n't survive the beach</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An e-book won't survive the beach</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032356</id>
	<title>Uh, yeah....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265362260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... it's that the basic point... eBooks are SUPPOSED to kill paper books. Or at least replace them, for those who use eBooks. Who will more every year, particularly once the proprietary formats fail and eBooks can be ready by every eBook reader.</p><p>As for Hardcover prices... well, there's a difference between the quality and longevity of a hardcover versus the paperback. That's the only true value of the hardcover book. The rest is marketing... the early release... like seeing a film in the theater now, or waiting for the DVD or Blu-Ray later... or the HBO presentation later still.</p><p>But that's not true of an eBook... there is virtually no cost of duplication, far cheaper to make than paperbacks. And more restricted, at least with DRM; you can't resell them, or lend them in any real way. You may not be able to annotate them, either. Thus, much less value than a paperback, in the same way that MP3 and AACs are of lower value -- the product itself, then a CD. Some value may be regained at the point-of-sale; they're sold in other ways: singles and impulse... I can buy a piece of a CD, and have it right now. That keeps the basic individual price relative high.. and yet, I've still managed to buy whole MP3 albums on Amazon for $2-$4 each. Which is about the right value, versus an $8-12 CD, or $15-$20 SACD or DVD-Audio Disc.</p><p>It's understandable that the publishers don't like this, in general. For one, they understand hardcovers and paperbacks, but can't quite get their heads wrapped around an eBook as being something different. They want it to be a hardcover, Amazon wants it to be a paperback, but delivered at about the same time as a hardcover. I think, in reality, this is a different form, and needs to be treated as such. For one, there are lots of publisher's expenses associated with a hardcover: printing fees, distribution, in-store kiosks, maybe shelving fees, etc. All of these, at the very least, should be subtracted from the retail price and the publisher's piece of the book sale. Otherwise, they're going to be using this as a trick to increase revenues, even though they're performing significantly less of a service.</p><p>And in fact, that's the real issue here. The book publishing industry has never been quite as abusive of "the talent" as the record industry, but they still want the bulk of profits if they can get it. If I buy a book, it still lists the author's copyright... most CDs will claim a copyright by the record company, despite their being just another kind of publisher. This has resulted in push-back by artists, some self-publishing, some going all digital or mostly digital. That works, particularly for established artists (Prince, Radiohead, Nine Inch Nails, etc). The rise of eBooks will enable this same route by writers. Maybe not for awhile.. the eBook reader is a relative new thing, but already at some level of acceptance due to the use of general purpose computers, just as the walkman and similar personal stereos laid the ground for an easy acceptance, then dominance, of the MP3 player/PMP.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... it 's that the basic point... eBooks are SUPPOSED to kill paper books .
Or at least replace them , for those who use eBooks .
Who will more every year , particularly once the proprietary formats fail and eBooks can be ready by every eBook reader.As for Hardcover prices... well , there 's a difference between the quality and longevity of a hardcover versus the paperback .
That 's the only true value of the hardcover book .
The rest is marketing... the early release... like seeing a film in the theater now , or waiting for the DVD or Blu-Ray later... or the HBO presentation later still.But that 's not true of an eBook... there is virtually no cost of duplication , far cheaper to make than paperbacks .
And more restricted , at least with DRM ; you ca n't resell them , or lend them in any real way .
You may not be able to annotate them , either .
Thus , much less value than a paperback , in the same way that MP3 and AACs are of lower value -- the product itself , then a CD .
Some value may be regained at the point-of-sale ; they 're sold in other ways : singles and impulse... I can buy a piece of a CD , and have it right now .
That keeps the basic individual price relative high.. and yet , I 've still managed to buy whole MP3 albums on Amazon for $ 2- $ 4 each .
Which is about the right value , versus an $ 8-12 CD , or $ 15- $ 20 SACD or DVD-Audio Disc.It 's understandable that the publishers do n't like this , in general .
For one , they understand hardcovers and paperbacks , but ca n't quite get their heads wrapped around an eBook as being something different .
They want it to be a hardcover , Amazon wants it to be a paperback , but delivered at about the same time as a hardcover .
I think , in reality , this is a different form , and needs to be treated as such .
For one , there are lots of publisher 's expenses associated with a hardcover : printing fees , distribution , in-store kiosks , maybe shelving fees , etc .
All of these , at the very least , should be subtracted from the retail price and the publisher 's piece of the book sale .
Otherwise , they 're going to be using this as a trick to increase revenues , even though they 're performing significantly less of a service.And in fact , that 's the real issue here .
The book publishing industry has never been quite as abusive of " the talent " as the record industry , but they still want the bulk of profits if they can get it .
If I buy a book , it still lists the author 's copyright... most CDs will claim a copyright by the record company , despite their being just another kind of publisher .
This has resulted in push-back by artists , some self-publishing , some going all digital or mostly digital .
That works , particularly for established artists ( Prince , Radiohead , Nine Inch Nails , etc ) .
The rise of eBooks will enable this same route by writers .
Maybe not for awhile.. the eBook reader is a relative new thing , but already at some level of acceptance due to the use of general purpose computers , just as the walkman and similar personal stereos laid the ground for an easy acceptance , then dominance , of the MP3 player/PMP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... it's that the basic point... eBooks are SUPPOSED to kill paper books.
Or at least replace them, for those who use eBooks.
Who will more every year, particularly once the proprietary formats fail and eBooks can be ready by every eBook reader.As for Hardcover prices... well, there's a difference between the quality and longevity of a hardcover versus the paperback.
That's the only true value of the hardcover book.
The rest is marketing... the early release... like seeing a film in the theater now, or waiting for the DVD or Blu-Ray later... or the HBO presentation later still.But that's not true of an eBook... there is virtually no cost of duplication, far cheaper to make than paperbacks.
And more restricted, at least with DRM; you can't resell them, or lend them in any real way.
You may not be able to annotate them, either.
Thus, much less value than a paperback, in the same way that MP3 and AACs are of lower value -- the product itself, then a CD.
Some value may be regained at the point-of-sale; they're sold in other ways: singles and impulse... I can buy a piece of a CD, and have it right now.
That keeps the basic individual price relative high.. and yet, I've still managed to buy whole MP3 albums on Amazon for $2-$4 each.
Which is about the right value, versus an $8-12 CD, or $15-$20 SACD or DVD-Audio Disc.It's understandable that the publishers don't like this, in general.
For one, they understand hardcovers and paperbacks, but can't quite get their heads wrapped around an eBook as being something different.
They want it to be a hardcover, Amazon wants it to be a paperback, but delivered at about the same time as a hardcover.
I think, in reality, this is a different form, and needs to be treated as such.
For one, there are lots of publisher's expenses associated with a hardcover: printing fees, distribution, in-store kiosks, maybe shelving fees, etc.
All of these, at the very least, should be subtracted from the retail price and the publisher's piece of the book sale.
Otherwise, they're going to be using this as a trick to increase revenues, even though they're performing significantly less of a service.And in fact, that's the real issue here.
The book publishing industry has never been quite as abusive of "the talent" as the record industry, but they still want the bulk of profits if they can get it.
If I buy a book, it still lists the author's copyright... most CDs will claim a copyright by the record company, despite their being just another kind of publisher.
This has resulted in push-back by artists, some self-publishing, some going all digital or mostly digital.
That works, particularly for established artists (Prince, Radiohead, Nine Inch Nails, etc).
The rise of eBooks will enable this same route by writers.
Maybe not for awhile.. the eBook reader is a relative new thing, but already at some level of acceptance due to the use of general purpose computers, just as the walkman and similar personal stereos laid the ground for an easy acceptance, then dominance, of the MP3 player/PMP.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034834</id>
	<title>Re:This just in...</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1265387520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The whole economy around ebooks is different from paper books, but they want that ebooks with digital distribution cost the same as paper ones with physical distribution. Is like you want to go to Vienna Street (supposing that is a street called that way in your city) and the bus charges you the price of a plane ticket to the city of Vienna. You end in some place called Vienna in both cases, but one of the charges is a bit unfair (and you probably will sue the bus driver, or company, or whoever set that price)</htmltext>
<tokenext>The whole economy around ebooks is different from paper books , but they want that ebooks with digital distribution cost the same as paper ones with physical distribution .
Is like you want to go to Vienna Street ( supposing that is a street called that way in your city ) and the bus charges you the price of a plane ticket to the city of Vienna .
You end in some place called Vienna in both cases , but one of the charges is a bit unfair ( and you probably will sue the bus driver , or company , or whoever set that price )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The whole economy around ebooks is different from paper books, but they want that ebooks with digital distribution cost the same as paper ones with physical distribution.
Is like you want to go to Vienna Street (supposing that is a street called that way in your city) and the bus charges you the price of a plane ticket to the city of Vienna.
You end in some place called Vienna in both cases, but one of the charges is a bit unfair (and you probably will sue the bus driver, or company, or whoever set that price)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031668</id>
	<title>Re:Okay</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265309460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Rupert Murdoch and his pet team of Congressman says it's not. Now stop complaining, he's training them to pull a gold 4 ton sledge across the snow for the next Iditarod</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Rupert Murdoch and his pet team of Congressman says it 's not .
Now stop complaining , he 's training them to pull a gold 4 ton sledge across the snow for the next Iditarod</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rupert Murdoch and his pet team of Congressman says it's not.
Now stop complaining, he's training them to pull a gold 4 ton sledge across the snow for the next Iditarod</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031438</id>
	<title>Re:So what he's saying is...</title>
	<author>XanC</author>
	<datestamp>1265307540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You realize his 101-year-old mother is still around and apparently doing quite well?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You realize his 101-year-old mother is still around and apparently doing quite well ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You realize his 101-year-old mother is still around and apparently doing quite well?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031268</id>
	<title>Re:The information market was like the housing mar</title>
	<author>bschorr</author>
	<datestamp>1265306340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Except the reality is that only a very few actually make an "obscene profit".  The vast majority of books, films and music wither and die with very little revenue.  For every Dan Brown or J.K. Rowling there are a thousand other writers who will never make even a part-time wage for their works.<br><br>Book publishing is an expensive business and e-books level the playing field considerably.  The three biggest costs in book production are (not necessarily in this order):<br><br>1. Printing<br>2. Marketing<br>3. Distribution<br><br>A publisher needs to have confidence that a book will sell X copies at Y price in order to know that they will at least break even on publishing it.  And I guarantee you that every publisher has a warehouse full of books they guessed wrong on and nobody bought.  But those costs are sunk.  They pay get pennies on the dollar at the paper recycler but otherwise they've blown a lot of cash printing books they never sold.<br><br>As on-demand, and now e-book, publishing has become more and more viable the break-even point has come WAY down and books that would never have seen the light of day are getting their chance.<br><br>And publishers should LOVE eBooks - it takes printing and distribution largely out of the equation and means far greater profits off a much lower price.  I wouldn't mind if my publisher did Kindle versions of my books, that's just one more medium and a much higher net profit from the books.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except the reality is that only a very few actually make an " obscene profit " .
The vast majority of books , films and music wither and die with very little revenue .
For every Dan Brown or J.K. Rowling there are a thousand other writers who will never make even a part-time wage for their works.Book publishing is an expensive business and e-books level the playing field considerably .
The three biggest costs in book production are ( not necessarily in this order ) : 1 .
Printing2. Marketing3 .
DistributionA publisher needs to have confidence that a book will sell X copies at Y price in order to know that they will at least break even on publishing it .
And I guarantee you that every publisher has a warehouse full of books they guessed wrong on and nobody bought .
But those costs are sunk .
They pay get pennies on the dollar at the paper recycler but otherwise they 've blown a lot of cash printing books they never sold.As on-demand , and now e-book , publishing has become more and more viable the break-even point has come WAY down and books that would never have seen the light of day are getting their chance.And publishers should LOVE eBooks - it takes printing and distribution largely out of the equation and means far greater profits off a much lower price .
I would n't mind if my publisher did Kindle versions of my books , that 's just one more medium and a much higher net profit from the books .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except the reality is that only a very few actually make an "obscene profit".
The vast majority of books, films and music wither and die with very little revenue.
For every Dan Brown or J.K. Rowling there are a thousand other writers who will never make even a part-time wage for their works.Book publishing is an expensive business and e-books level the playing field considerably.
The three biggest costs in book production are (not necessarily in this order):1.
Printing2. Marketing3.
DistributionA publisher needs to have confidence that a book will sell X copies at Y price in order to know that they will at least break even on publishing it.
And I guarantee you that every publisher has a warehouse full of books they guessed wrong on and nobody bought.
But those costs are sunk.
They pay get pennies on the dollar at the paper recycler but otherwise they've blown a lot of cash printing books they never sold.As on-demand, and now e-book, publishing has become more and more viable the break-even point has come WAY down and books that would never have seen the light of day are getting their chance.And publishers should LOVE eBooks - it takes printing and distribution largely out of the equation and means far greater profits off a much lower price.
I wouldn't mind if my publisher did Kindle versions of my books, that's just one more medium and a much higher net profit from the books.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346</id>
	<title>Let's do the math.</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1265306760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>eBook: $10.00<br># times you can loan: 0<br># years you can own: probably  10<br>Resale value: $0.00</p><p>Paperback: $7.00<br># times you can loan: personal best, oh, about 10<br># years you can own: personal best, 34<br>Resale value: personal best, $27.00</p><p>Yeh, I can see how eBooks are undercutting paperbacks.</p><p>Hardcovers? Who buys hardcovers?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>eBook : $ 10.00 # times you can loan : 0 # years you can own : probably 10Resale value : $ 0.00Paperback : $ 7.00 # times you can loan : personal best , oh , about 10 # years you can own : personal best , 34Resale value : personal best , $ 27.00Yeh , I can see how eBooks are undercutting paperbacks.Hardcovers ?
Who buys hardcovers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>eBook: $10.00# times you can loan: 0# years you can own: probably  10Resale value: $0.00Paperback: $7.00# times you can loan: personal best, oh, about 10# years you can own: personal best, 34Resale value: personal best, $27.00Yeh, I can see how eBooks are undercutting paperbacks.Hardcovers?
Who buys hardcovers?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31040382</id>
	<title>Re:Let's do the math.</title>
	<author>ucblockhead</author>
	<datestamp>1265368920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Given that a major publisher is willing to see all their books delisted in the bookstore with the largest marketshare to avoid having ebooks priced to undercut their hard covers, one suspects that a hell of a lot of people are buying hardcovers.</p><p>It is also very important to note that the question is about what ebooks sell for before the paperback is available.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Given that a major publisher is willing to see all their books delisted in the bookstore with the largest marketshare to avoid having ebooks priced to undercut their hard covers , one suspects that a hell of a lot of people are buying hardcovers.It is also very important to note that the question is about what ebooks sell for before the paperback is available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given that a major publisher is willing to see all their books delisted in the bookstore with the largest marketshare to avoid having ebooks priced to undercut their hard covers, one suspects that a hell of a lot of people are buying hardcovers.It is also very important to note that the question is about what ebooks sell for before the paperback is available.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035044</id>
	<title>Re:9.99 isn't CHEAP for an ebook you don't own</title>
	<author>Zerth</author>
	<datestamp>1265388780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Meanwhile, a hurricane hit his house while he was away and all his old paper books were completely ruined.  Thousands of dollars in damage, some irreplaceable because they never sold enough to have a used market. Fortunately, after replacing his salt-damaged kindle, he was able to redownload all the ebooks he had bought, for no additional charge, as well as his most prized paper books that he had the foresight to scan.</p><p>An ereader is only expensive compared to the cost of replacing a few books. I lost many books to water damage and have yet to replace all my favorites because I can't find them on the used book market, nor as the bookwarez, because they were too old or had too small a print run.  Now that publishers don't need to keep their backlist in print to sell them, I hope I won't have this problem again.  But until they get everything switched over, I scan.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Meanwhile , a hurricane hit his house while he was away and all his old paper books were completely ruined .
Thousands of dollars in damage , some irreplaceable because they never sold enough to have a used market .
Fortunately , after replacing his salt-damaged kindle , he was able to redownload all the ebooks he had bought , for no additional charge , as well as his most prized paper books that he had the foresight to scan.An ereader is only expensive compared to the cost of replacing a few books .
I lost many books to water damage and have yet to replace all my favorites because I ca n't find them on the used book market , nor as the bookwarez , because they were too old or had too small a print run .
Now that publishers do n't need to keep their backlist in print to sell them , I hope I wo n't have this problem again .
But until they get everything switched over , I scan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Meanwhile, a hurricane hit his house while he was away and all his old paper books were completely ruined.
Thousands of dollars in damage, some irreplaceable because they never sold enough to have a used market.
Fortunately, after replacing his salt-damaged kindle, he was able to redownload all the ebooks he had bought, for no additional charge, as well as his most prized paper books that he had the foresight to scan.An ereader is only expensive compared to the cost of replacing a few books.
I lost many books to water damage and have yet to replace all my favorites because I can't find them on the used book market, nor as the bookwarez, because they were too old or had too small a print run.
Now that publishers don't need to keep their backlist in print to sell them, I hope I won't have this problem again.
But until they get everything switched over, I scan.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032654</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031730</id>
	<title>I don't think so.</title>
	<author>MikeFM</author>
	<datestamp>1265310060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They should fire the proofreaders as a start as I frequently see a lot of errors including lots that a spellchecker could have caught if it had been used. Sell the eBook first and make it easy to submit errata found back to the publisher. Make it so the books can be easily updated as problems are fixed. When the book stabilizes then make a hardback version.

The authors I've talked to have told me they make very little for a book. So if the author is making $1 for a $20 book and the publisher isn't making anything you're telling me the editor is making most the buck? Obviously MSRP is usually something like 50\% - 100\% markup over what the publisher sells the book for so you're saying that a book they sell for $10 and pay the author $1 that there is absolutely no profit in that other 9$? Even if they aren't paying for printing, distributing, etc? If that is so they must be horrible inefficient. I run eCommerce businesses for a living and typically we sell products for 3\% - 14\% over our price and still manage okay. I'd guess we sell a lot fewer units than any major publisher so I doubt they are seriously hurting. I doubt they are losing a large part of their sliver of income in credit card fees and such either.

Which comes to the reason why retailers sell for low margins these days. With global competition you can't sell most products at 100\% markup anymore. Lower your prices and you sell more units and make more money. Of course that is balanced by how many people are interested in buying your product at any price and as a retailer we balance for that by trying to choose hotter items, selling a wider range of items, building customer loyalty, and trying to build our customer base. I'm sure a successful publisher would behave in a similar way. Make books people want to read. Court authors that are popular. No surprise there. Make more books on more topics. Maybe sell something besides just books. Publishers should be looking into semi-interactive books I think. This is a concept that has finally come and they should be getting on board. I've bought lots of kids game/books for iPod this way but I don't think it has to be just for kids. Books that are in a series are an obvious idea for publishers. If a customer reads book #1 and it's good then probably they'll want to read books #2 - #9 too. Possibly the hardest thing for publishers is to encourage more people to read. Cheap eBooks would seem a really good way of doing that. Cheap + easy to get means it's more interesting to consumers. Pushing books on kids and funding reading programs is another good method. Making semi-interactive books may be a good way of growing interest too as it broadens the appeal. All you really need is an author and an editor and a PC each. Anything else can be cut if their profits are really that low.

All in all it's nothing surprising but I call bullshit on publishers if they claim they can't sell eBooks cheaper and still do good business.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They should fire the proofreaders as a start as I frequently see a lot of errors including lots that a spellchecker could have caught if it had been used .
Sell the eBook first and make it easy to submit errata found back to the publisher .
Make it so the books can be easily updated as problems are fixed .
When the book stabilizes then make a hardback version .
The authors I 've talked to have told me they make very little for a book .
So if the author is making $ 1 for a $ 20 book and the publisher is n't making anything you 're telling me the editor is making most the buck ?
Obviously MSRP is usually something like 50 \ % - 100 \ % markup over what the publisher sells the book for so you 're saying that a book they sell for $ 10 and pay the author $ 1 that there is absolutely no profit in that other 9 $ ?
Even if they are n't paying for printing , distributing , etc ?
If that is so they must be horrible inefficient .
I run eCommerce businesses for a living and typically we sell products for 3 \ % - 14 \ % over our price and still manage okay .
I 'd guess we sell a lot fewer units than any major publisher so I doubt they are seriously hurting .
I doubt they are losing a large part of their sliver of income in credit card fees and such either .
Which comes to the reason why retailers sell for low margins these days .
With global competition you ca n't sell most products at 100 \ % markup anymore .
Lower your prices and you sell more units and make more money .
Of course that is balanced by how many people are interested in buying your product at any price and as a retailer we balance for that by trying to choose hotter items , selling a wider range of items , building customer loyalty , and trying to build our customer base .
I 'm sure a successful publisher would behave in a similar way .
Make books people want to read .
Court authors that are popular .
No surprise there .
Make more books on more topics .
Maybe sell something besides just books .
Publishers should be looking into semi-interactive books I think .
This is a concept that has finally come and they should be getting on board .
I 've bought lots of kids game/books for iPod this way but I do n't think it has to be just for kids .
Books that are in a series are an obvious idea for publishers .
If a customer reads book # 1 and it 's good then probably they 'll want to read books # 2 - # 9 too .
Possibly the hardest thing for publishers is to encourage more people to read .
Cheap eBooks would seem a really good way of doing that .
Cheap + easy to get means it 's more interesting to consumers .
Pushing books on kids and funding reading programs is another good method .
Making semi-interactive books may be a good way of growing interest too as it broadens the appeal .
All you really need is an author and an editor and a PC each .
Anything else can be cut if their profits are really that low .
All in all it 's nothing surprising but I call bullshit on publishers if they claim they ca n't sell eBooks cheaper and still do good business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They should fire the proofreaders as a start as I frequently see a lot of errors including lots that a spellchecker could have caught if it had been used.
Sell the eBook first and make it easy to submit errata found back to the publisher.
Make it so the books can be easily updated as problems are fixed.
When the book stabilizes then make a hardback version.
The authors I've talked to have told me they make very little for a book.
So if the author is making $1 for a $20 book and the publisher isn't making anything you're telling me the editor is making most the buck?
Obviously MSRP is usually something like 50\% - 100\% markup over what the publisher sells the book for so you're saying that a book they sell for $10 and pay the author $1 that there is absolutely no profit in that other 9$?
Even if they aren't paying for printing, distributing, etc?
If that is so they must be horrible inefficient.
I run eCommerce businesses for a living and typically we sell products for 3\% - 14\% over our price and still manage okay.
I'd guess we sell a lot fewer units than any major publisher so I doubt they are seriously hurting.
I doubt they are losing a large part of their sliver of income in credit card fees and such either.
Which comes to the reason why retailers sell for low margins these days.
With global competition you can't sell most products at 100\% markup anymore.
Lower your prices and you sell more units and make more money.
Of course that is balanced by how many people are interested in buying your product at any price and as a retailer we balance for that by trying to choose hotter items, selling a wider range of items, building customer loyalty, and trying to build our customer base.
I'm sure a successful publisher would behave in a similar way.
Make books people want to read.
Court authors that are popular.
No surprise there.
Make more books on more topics.
Maybe sell something besides just books.
Publishers should be looking into semi-interactive books I think.
This is a concept that has finally come and they should be getting on board.
I've bought lots of kids game/books for iPod this way but I don't think it has to be just for kids.
Books that are in a series are an obvious idea for publishers.
If a customer reads book #1 and it's good then probably they'll want to read books #2 - #9 too.
Possibly the hardest thing for publishers is to encourage more people to read.
Cheap eBooks would seem a really good way of doing that.
Cheap + easy to get means it's more interesting to consumers.
Pushing books on kids and funding reading programs is another good method.
Making semi-interactive books may be a good way of growing interest too as it broadens the appeal.
All you really need is an author and an editor and a PC each.
Anything else can be cut if their profits are really that low.
All in all it's nothing surprising but I call bullshit on publishers if they claim they can't sell eBooks cheaper and still do good business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035318</id>
	<title>Re:This just in...</title>
	<author>RyuuzakiTetsuya</author>
	<datestamp>1265390040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This time, book sellers didn't miss the boat.  They were on board with Kindle, they're on board with Nook, and they're on board, in theory, with the iPad.</p><p>Rupert Murdoch and by extension, Harper Collins, did, however, miss that boat.</p><p>(Am I the only one who's having a hard time reading the comments and the article with out hearing keith olbermann's murdoch impression going in their head?)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This time , book sellers did n't miss the boat .
They were on board with Kindle , they 're on board with Nook , and they 're on board , in theory , with the iPad.Rupert Murdoch and by extension , Harper Collins , did , however , miss that boat .
( Am I the only one who 's having a hard time reading the comments and the article with out hearing keith olbermann 's murdoch impression going in their head ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This time, book sellers didn't miss the boat.
They were on board with Kindle, they're on board with Nook, and they're on board, in theory, with the iPad.Rupert Murdoch and by extension, Harper Collins, did, however, miss that boat.
(Am I the only one who's having a hard time reading the comments and the article with out hearing keith olbermann's murdoch impression going in their head?
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031030</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031278</id>
	<title>Re:For what it's worth</title>
	<author>MikeFM</author>
	<datestamp>1265306400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I read a lot. What I want is the hardback/paperback to come with a free download of the eBook. I like to read the paper book when I can but it's a lot easier to carry a Kindle or iPad with me when I'm out of town, or just at the office, than half a dozen books. Also I like being able to search a book - it's especially handy for textbooks and tech books.

I have tens of thousands of books saved on my laptop. I tend to buy the paper edition of books I like but if the publishers make me feel like they are out to screw me I could easily just stick to the digital copies. Some of my textbooks didn't have electronic versions available so I had the bindings cut off and ran them through the scanner (it has a feeder) and ran OCR on them. It works quite well. Just refusing to offer electronic copies won't keep them off the Internet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I read a lot .
What I want is the hardback/paperback to come with a free download of the eBook .
I like to read the paper book when I can but it 's a lot easier to carry a Kindle or iPad with me when I 'm out of town , or just at the office , than half a dozen books .
Also I like being able to search a book - it 's especially handy for textbooks and tech books .
I have tens of thousands of books saved on my laptop .
I tend to buy the paper edition of books I like but if the publishers make me feel like they are out to screw me I could easily just stick to the digital copies .
Some of my textbooks did n't have electronic versions available so I had the bindings cut off and ran them through the scanner ( it has a feeder ) and ran OCR on them .
It works quite well .
Just refusing to offer electronic copies wo n't keep them off the Internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read a lot.
What I want is the hardback/paperback to come with a free download of the eBook.
I like to read the paper book when I can but it's a lot easier to carry a Kindle or iPad with me when I'm out of town, or just at the office, than half a dozen books.
Also I like being able to search a book - it's especially handy for textbooks and tech books.
I have tens of thousands of books saved on my laptop.
I tend to buy the paper edition of books I like but if the publishers make me feel like they are out to screw me I could easily just stick to the digital copies.
Some of my textbooks didn't have electronic versions available so I had the bindings cut off and ran them through the scanner (it has a feeder) and ran OCR on them.
It works quite well.
Just refusing to offer electronic copies won't keep them off the Internet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032238</id>
	<title>Re:Prices</title>
	<author>Totenglocke</author>
	<datestamp>1265360760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Almost all of the cost of a book is the cost of paying the author/editor/proofreader plus the retail markup. These costs remain the same regardless of format.</p></div><p>People always point out that being a musician was never a way to become obscenely rich, so why should writing?  I'm a huge book lover, but there's no justifiable reason for why book prices should be inflated so that authors can all be rich.  A reasonable price would allow an average author an average income, a good author a good income (say $80k / year) and an amazing author would make a very nice income - all because of people buying their books as a reward for them doing a good job.  A $3 ebook allows for the author to get $1, the editor/proofreader to get $1, and the book seller (Amazon, iBooks Store, etc) $1.  That means if their book is a hit and sells 100,000 copies, then the author, the editor, and the store all get $100,000.  I'm willing to even go so high as to say $5 is a fair price for an ebook since it costs $8 for a paperback - which means that the cost of making the book, shipping the book, inventory costs, and paying people at the bookstores are all factored into that, there's no reason for ebooks to cost more than $5.</p><p>Not every author is going to be rich.  There's a reason why up until the last century, being an author wasn't considered a "respectable" job - because it wasn't a job where you weren't going to get rich.  I love books and respect authors, however, the "professional writer" isn't someone who should be making hundreds of thousands of dollars (or more) a year.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Almost all of the cost of a book is the cost of paying the author/editor/proofreader plus the retail markup .
These costs remain the same regardless of format.People always point out that being a musician was never a way to become obscenely rich , so why should writing ?
I 'm a huge book lover , but there 's no justifiable reason for why book prices should be inflated so that authors can all be rich .
A reasonable price would allow an average author an average income , a good author a good income ( say $ 80k / year ) and an amazing author would make a very nice income - all because of people buying their books as a reward for them doing a good job .
A $ 3 ebook allows for the author to get $ 1 , the editor/proofreader to get $ 1 , and the book seller ( Amazon , iBooks Store , etc ) $ 1 .
That means if their book is a hit and sells 100,000 copies , then the author , the editor , and the store all get $ 100,000 .
I 'm willing to even go so high as to say $ 5 is a fair price for an ebook since it costs $ 8 for a paperback - which means that the cost of making the book , shipping the book , inventory costs , and paying people at the bookstores are all factored into that , there 's no reason for ebooks to cost more than $ 5.Not every author is going to be rich .
There 's a reason why up until the last century , being an author was n't considered a " respectable " job - because it was n't a job where you were n't going to get rich .
I love books and respect authors , however , the " professional writer " is n't someone who should be making hundreds of thousands of dollars ( or more ) a year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Almost all of the cost of a book is the cost of paying the author/editor/proofreader plus the retail markup.
These costs remain the same regardless of format.People always point out that being a musician was never a way to become obscenely rich, so why should writing?
I'm a huge book lover, but there's no justifiable reason for why book prices should be inflated so that authors can all be rich.
A reasonable price would allow an average author an average income, a good author a good income (say $80k / year) and an amazing author would make a very nice income - all because of people buying their books as a reward for them doing a good job.
A $3 ebook allows for the author to get $1, the editor/proofreader to get $1, and the book seller (Amazon, iBooks Store, etc) $1.
That means if their book is a hit and sells 100,000 copies, then the author, the editor, and the store all get $100,000.
I'm willing to even go so high as to say $5 is a fair price for an ebook since it costs $8 for a paperback - which means that the cost of making the book, shipping the book, inventory costs, and paying people at the bookstores are all factored into that, there's no reason for ebooks to cost more than $5.Not every author is going to be rich.
There's a reason why up until the last century, being an author wasn't considered a "respectable" job - because it wasn't a job where you weren't going to get rich.
I love books and respect authors, however, the "professional writer" isn't someone who should be making hundreds of thousands of dollars (or more) a year.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032372</id>
	<title>Re:This just in...</title>
	<author>msimm</author>
	<datestamp>1265362440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's to figure out? Either they completely re-invent themselves as digital media publishers and let <i>every other old-school media company</i> fight to bury/sue/discredit or otherwise marginalize them/their business (naturally, while picking their bones and pulling off anything remaining of value) or they themselves join in the frenzy to bury/sue/discredit or otherwise marginalize anyone else who dares to embrace the only actually viable media publishing option available to big business.<br> <br>
We once had to cut down trees to dispense news and information then carry/freight/ship it <i>around the whole world</i> just so that people could use it. But none of that's been true for us since the last century and none of <i>our children will ever remember otherwise</i>. I guess I wish I was so important that if I complained loudly enough (or legally enough) everyone around me would pretend everything was business as normal too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's to figure out ?
Either they completely re-invent themselves as digital media publishers and let every other old-school media company fight to bury/sue/discredit or otherwise marginalize them/their business ( naturally , while picking their bones and pulling off anything remaining of value ) or they themselves join in the frenzy to bury/sue/discredit or otherwise marginalize anyone else who dares to embrace the only actually viable media publishing option available to big business .
We once had to cut down trees to dispense news and information then carry/freight/ship it around the whole world just so that people could use it .
But none of that 's been true for us since the last century and none of our children will ever remember otherwise .
I guess I wish I was so important that if I complained loudly enough ( or legally enough ) everyone around me would pretend everything was business as normal too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's to figure out?
Either they completely re-invent themselves as digital media publishers and let every other old-school media company fight to bury/sue/discredit or otherwise marginalize them/their business (naturally, while picking their bones and pulling off anything remaining of value) or they themselves join in the frenzy to bury/sue/discredit or otherwise marginalize anyone else who dares to embrace the only actually viable media publishing option available to big business.
We once had to cut down trees to dispense news and information then carry/freight/ship it around the whole world just so that people could use it.
But none of that's been true for us since the last century and none of our children will ever remember otherwise.
I guess I wish I was so important that if I complained loudly enough (or legally enough) everyone around me would pretend everything was business as normal too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031030</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031036</id>
	<title>Re:iPad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265304480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I noticed that pictures advertising the iPad always have the New York Times front and center. I think a deal has already been done between Apple and News Corp.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I noticed that pictures advertising the iPad always have the New York Times front and center .
I think a deal has already been done between Apple and News Corp .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I noticed that pictures advertising the iPad always have the New York Times front and center.
I think a deal has already been done between Apple and News Corp.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033442</id>
	<title>Re:So what he's saying is...</title>
	<author>hey!</author>
	<datestamp>1265377380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, except we ain't talkin' "Bumpits" here.  Books aren't just another product. They are the foundation of our civilization.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , except we ai n't talkin ' " Bumpits " here .
Books are n't just another product .
They are the foundation of our civilization .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, except we ain't talkin' "Bumpits" here.
Books aren't just another product.
They are the foundation of our civilization.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030786</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031352
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031976
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31039202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031666
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034766
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035044
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031048
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031640
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032102
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035938
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31040678
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031462
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031032
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031020
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031668
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031052
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031532
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31036048
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31040382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031194
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031814
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032946
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030840
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031806
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031692
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035740
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031096
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030840
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31052814
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031236
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032682
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031508
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032372
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031598
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031642
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031912
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031544
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31039960
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031278
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032120
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031280
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033798
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034502
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031390
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030784
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032062
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031568
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031182
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31036366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033090
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031616
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031056
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031624
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031062
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031630
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033482
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032002
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31037320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031280
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31037816
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31036156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_05_006239_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031120
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031638
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031668
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031624
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031268
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031052
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031532
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030930
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031278
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031112
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031024
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031630
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033482
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030864
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031048
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031036
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032002
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031616
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031984
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31039960
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032120
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035114
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033644
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31036366
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31040382
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031224
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31036156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031912
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031866
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030840
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31052814
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030786
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031976
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031248
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031438
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031666
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031692
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033442
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031774
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31037320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031500
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033254
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031576
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035070
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032356
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034502
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030784
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032062
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031162
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030978
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031236
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031908
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031806
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031528
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031154
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031090
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032774
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031568
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031998
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31036048
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031020
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033798
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031096
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032074
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031352
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031544
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031282
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032682
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032264
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031194
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031246
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031598
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031642
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031344
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034074
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033454
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031026
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031030
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035318
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032372
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032150
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034886
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035740
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034766
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034834
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31033090
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031640
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032102
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035938
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031872
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031590
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031280
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31037816
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035994
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031202
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31032654
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31035044
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031336
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31040678
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31034906
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031056
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031462
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031704
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031032
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31031074
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_05_006239.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31030938
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_05_006239.31039202
</commentlist>
</conversation>
