Comments on: Harry Potter and a nightmare for the high street bookshops

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:59:18 +0000

Who decides which books get press (Harry Potter) and which get censored? After all, censorship is becoming America’s favorite past-time. The US gov’t (and their corporate friends), already detain protesters, ban books like “America Deceived” from Amazon and Wikipedia, shut down Imus and fire 21-year tenured, BYU physics professor Steven Jones because he proved explosives, thermite in particular, took down the WTC buildings. Free Speech forever (especially for books).
Last link (before Google Books caves to pressure and drops the title):
http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?&isbn=0-595-38523-0

By: Clive Keeble

Clive Keeble — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 09:39:57 +0000

Danuta

Please read Bloomsbury’s last set of accounts, and how they grossly over-valued digital reference rights. Money is of no use to a spendthrift such as Bloomsbury who have squandered so much of the HP inheritance.

When a publisher mugs away an author’s work as with “A Thousand Splendid Suns” then they are facing towards Carey Street. Please remember that “The Kite Runner” is one of the very few modern first editions from the 21st century which is genuinely collectable (true 1st prints, fine in fine d/w command upwards of £200)

By: Danuta Kean

Danuta Kean — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 08:51:18 +0000

I think Bloomsbury is very safe from failure, not least because of the money they have made from Harry, and they have had a few successes under their belt, such as Jonathan Strange, don’t forget.

By: Clive Keeble

Clive Keeble — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 08:14:49 +0000

What is due to happen with HP7 is only to be expected given the current state of the booktrade ; however, what is not to be expected is that Bloomsbury should “mug away” the second book by Khaled Hosseini.

Bloomsbury ‘offered’ an exclusive free excerpt of this title to Amazon who are currently predatory pricing most populist titles to ensure that the terrestial booktrade finds it near impossible to make a profit from selling such lines.

“A Thousand Splendid Suns” was launched by Amazon at 55% discount, since lowered to 50% – Waterstone.com presumably felt that they had to match price and go 50% off.

Sure fire winners, guaranteed to sell in high volumes ; but treated like brussel sprouts by Bloomsbury who have had a disastrous track record in recent years outside HP and a few select authors.

I expect Bloomsbury to be but one of a long line of business failures in the next three years as publishers behave like demented shipwrecked sailors frantically bailing out the sinking lifeboat.

By: Danuta Kean

Danuta Kean — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 08:47:00 +0000

Thanks Sally. I tend to agree with Julia that these things are a double edged sword. Of course the great unsaid in all of this is the City and how the corporate shareholders create unrealistic pressure on a market. For Bloomsbury they are under pressure to find the “next Harry Potter” and for Waterstone’s to match the market share of Tesco…Capitalism hey?

By: Sally Lomax

Sally Lomax — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 19:30:06 +0000

That is very interesting. It seems bizarre. In the old days of course, it could never have happened because there was an agreement forbidding bookshops to undercut……….

I can’t feel too sorry for Bloomsbury really. They may lose a little in the short term – but they have benefited quite a lot too!

Excellent blog. I found you through Flowerpot Days.

By: Julia Williams

Julia Williams — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 09:17:46 +0000

ahhh that profit/loss problem sounds so familiar, Danuta. Great successes in publishing are such a double edged sword. All my time at Scholastic we were pushed harder and harder to produce more and more sales from our successful brands. There comes a time for every brand when the luck runs out and the punters stop buying… Bloomsbury have done such a fantastic job with HP, I hope they find something to take up some of the slack.