Daniel's book - Sold Out

[samsdmf]

This thread should be stickied in the Publishing forum, we have the top poker 'name' (I dont intend that as a putdown for Daniel in one bit) and the top poker publisher discussing subjects in great deal- in addition we have some of the best comments in NVG from 'normal' 2+2ers of the [ast year or so.
On SS2 I think im with Mason, I ordered the book for the O8 section and was impressed- Id like to know what Mason had to do with it! (afer the thinly veiled brag) although I must confss I didnt read Daniels section becuae I had no interest in learning the game (which is possibly why its so 'underrated')
Quite frankly I feel celerity endorsements will be far less vital in the next few years- with comprehensive and accurate reviews from the pubic avalable online for anyone to see, even the WPT fan is unlikely to buy a book that sucks; even if its endorsed by the curent superstar.
2+2 seems to be going down an interesting road- in the next couple of months they are releasing books written by Stox and RayZee (or at least co written) both these guys have clout and huge hgue respect within the community but are probably unheard of outside the 2+2 'scene'. I presume they are paying these guys large % of cash not because they are a big name buy because they know there books will be stunning; but will they sell as much as Chans limit book?

[polkaface]

[ QUOTE ]
I also believe Mason's statement about needing Negreanu to sell more books is foolish, and I've read this entire thread. Let's say 200,000 copies have been sold of HOH1 - if the book were only $15, should we expect that 400,000 copies have been sold? No, because the market has shown so far that only 200,000 purchasers have wanted a copy, despite it's price.

Ok, so let's take into account that it's "too expensive", thus limiting the sales on the books - does this mean that if HOH1 was suddenly $15 we should expect more copies sold simply because now there is a section of people who can afford it? Not realistically, because anybody who is genuinely interested in purchasing the book will find a way despite a $15 price difference.

True, Mason has a point in the fact that a cheaper book will have book stores buy more copies and in turn put more on the shelves, but this does *NOT* translate to a higher number of sales - how often do you have to go from bookstore to bookstore looking for a copy of Harrington on Hold' Em because it is sold out?

I rest my case; I can see why Mason would say something like that, but in the end it boils down to Mason trying to equate price with quality, and quality simply isn't something you can place a number value on, especially since what is quality to man A is incomprehensible to man B, and so forth.

[/ QUOTE ]


Econ 101. In a competitive market economy, people purchase a given amount at a given price. And a different amount at a different price. The quant/price cross for this product at $30 seems to be at 200k copies right now. At $15 I can guarantee you the amount of copies sold would be more than 200k (assuming more than 200k have been printed and assuming there are more than 200k literate poker players).

When using the argument "Despite its price" you are showing an opposite correlation (def of despite is "in spite of"). As in, it sold 500k copies DESPITE ITS HIGH PRICE.... or it didn't sell at all despite its price of $2.

Your argument is essentially that if the book were priced at $5 (or 15) not one single person more would have bought the book. Not even close to the truth. I haven't bought the book. At $5 or $15 I would buy it right this instant.

[tapefighter]

"If you don't know one, contact me privately and I can recommend an editor. Do you really want to publish a book where someone can come along and simply cross out every third or fourth word and then it reads better?"

I guess these standards have increased over time. When I read Hold'em Poker for Advanced Players a long time ago I recall it being practically unreadable. I actually created a chart in Excel in order to see the big picture and still capture all of the side comments/exceptions.

However, HOH was top notch.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Shadowrun:

There's also a little more evidence. It's the price of Negreanu's book itself. I'm sure if his publisher thought as many copies would be sold at $30 as at $15, it would be priced at $30.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi tapefighter:

You wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
I guess these standards have increased over time. When I read Hold'em Poker for Advanced Players a long time ago I recall it being practically unreadable. I actually created a chart in Excel in order to see the big picture and still capture all of the side comments/exceptions.

However, HOH was top notch.

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't I write this in one of my other posts?

[ QUOTE ]
The world of poker books has changed from what it was years ago when I started. Many authors out there don't realize how important it is to have their books very well written and produced in all aspects. Twenty years ago when Two Plus Two first began, this wasn't the case, but it is the case now.

[/ QUOTE ]

You need to keep in mind that the first edition of HPFAP was originally released in 1988. Two Plus Two Publishing didn't come into being for almost another year, and it wasn't until the early 1990s that HPFAP went through some good professional editing. There is no question that some of our very early editions of some of our original books would not be acceptable today.

But with that being said, we go to great efforts to make sure that our books are clearly written as well as being accurate and detailed. It's a lot of work, and as far as I can tell there are still some publishers out there who don't bother, but from a company point of view as well as the authors, it is well worth it.

Best wishes,
Mason

[samsdmf]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Shadowrun:

There's also a little more evidence. It's the price of Negreanu's book itself. I'm sure if his publisher thought as many copies would be sold at $30 as at $15, it would be priced at $30.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]
He possibly wasnt ready for the variance at the higher stakes.