[dchurchv]

Yes, of course, I'm not making an argument that concerts and books are the same business. That would be dumb.

I'm saying rather, there's no obvious reason to not get paid for them the same way, as long as the audience is willing. If they're not willing, that obviously won't work. But clearly in some cases (like the OPs), they are willing.

So as an author, you'd have to be irrational to not want to be paid as early as possible.

As a purchaser, you're free to vote with your wallet, and not pre-buy anything you don't want to. But if you want what the author is proposing, and want to give him encouragement by pre-buying, why is that somehow bad or wrong?

And my fuzzy calculus aside, the first printing for most books will also be the last one. So better to get the volume right. If only there were a way to accurately gauge demand before doing a printing...

[lutusp]

> And my fuzzy calculus aside, the first printing for most books will also be the last one.

This is not the norm in publishing, at least, the desirable kind. For most publishers who promote and market books, profits don't start until the first printing has sold out and subsequent printings begin, with (a) all book preparation activities already complete, and (b) a public who don't need to be persuaded of a book's value. It is at this point that an author begins to be looked on as more than a one-trick pony.

Imagine a pre-publication advertisement: "A truly epic myth! Floods, plagues, the anguish of being unimaginably stupid! Certain to be a best-seller if the author ever gets done writing it! Pre-order the Bible now -- get in before the rush!"

:)

> If only there were a way to accurately gauge demand before doing a printing...

In modern publishing, there's no need -- books are printed, one copy at a time, when they are ordered. For example, my book only gets printed after someone buys a copy. This change (electronic on-demand publishing) essentially wipes out the traditional publishing model.

[ahoyhere]

"This is not the norm in publishing, at least, the desirable kind."

Ah, it's good you said that. I always thought publishers like O'Reilly and Pragmatic Programmers were totally undesirable. Now I can point out why.

"In modern publishing, there's no need -- books are printed, one copy at a time, when they are ordered."

Cite?

[lutusp]

>> "In modern publishing, there's no need -- books are printed, one copy at a time, when they are ordered."

> Cite?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Print_on_demand

[ahoyhere]

I think we all know what Print on Demand is, but that Wikipedia page doesn't list any proof for your assertion that it is "the coming thing." The only publishers it lists as offering POD are specialty POD publishers.

That's hardly the sweeping industry change you described.

[lutusp]

Your objection is that there is little evidence in the present for an assertion about the future -- the "coming thing". Knock yourself out.

[ahoyhere]

You state things in the present tense:

"In modern publishing, there's no need -- books are printed, one copy at a time, when they are ordered… This change (electronic on-demand publishing) essentially wipes out the traditional publishing model."

This implies that this is the way things are, now, or will be in the very near future, for the majority. And there's no proof that "in modern publishing, books are printed, one copy at a time."