[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."

[lutusp]

> This implies that this is the way things are, now, or will be in the very near future, for the majority.

And? It's a reasonable prediction based on current trends, and see below for more evidence.

> And there's no proof that "in modern publishing, books are printed, one copy at a time."

What? That's true -- it is how "modern publishing" is distinguished from old-style publishing. This is not to say that the majority of books are published that way, but then I never made that claim.

In modern publishing, books are "printed" one copy at a time, when they are ordered. How is that remotely controversial? It covers on-demand publishing as well as e-books:

http://www.3dissue.com/ebook-market-share/

Quote: "Whilst the market has seen significant growth since 2008, the last 12 months in particular has shown a substantial rise. Between January 2011 to January 2012, sales in adult eBooks grew by 49.4%, while sales in children and young adult eBooks grew by 475.1%, according to the AAP. The good news for digital publishers is this trend is expected to continue."