• Home
  • About
    • For What it’s Worth
    • Michael Rushton
    • Contact
  • AJBlogs
  • ArtsJournal

For What It's Worth

Michael Rushton on pricing the arts

No more pocket versions of To Kill A Mockingbird

March 14, 2016 by Michael Rushton 3 Comments

BooThe estate of Harper Lee has decided to end its relationship with Hachette publishers, which was licensed through HarperCollins to produce a mass-market paperback edition of To Kill A Mockingbird. HarperCollins will continue to produce a trade paperback version. See these reports from The New Republic and The Guardian. Since the author only died this year, under current law the novel would not enter the public domain until 2086, though the duration of copyright tends to get longer rather than shorter with each revision, and so even that date cannot be depended on. School districts buy lots of mass market copies, and so that will be a big budget hit for them.

I’ll leave it to others to discuss the ethics of the case. But does the decision make economic sense? After all, we teach that price discrimination can be a way for firms in the arts (commercial and non-profit) to increase revenue at the same time as making lower-priced options available for the more price-sensitive consumers. True, but there are limits. Suppose you have the option of producing hard-cover (usually around $25), trade paperback (usually around $14), and mass-market paperback editions (usually around $7) of a novel. You know there is a small market for the hard-cover version, for people buying gifts or who simply want to have ‘the best.’ The trade paperback will be for those readers not so interested in the hard-cover. So offer at least those two versions. But what of the mass-market version? The problem is that it might be seen by buyers as too close a substitute for the trade paperback. Seen side-by-side in a bookshop, customers who would have been willing to buy the trade paperback pick up the cheaper mass-market version – the small difference in quality does not justify paying the big difference in price between the two versions. And so eliminating the mass-market version can be a profitable move. This is not uncommon – I don’t think you can find new mass-market copies of Hemingway either. Managers in other arts fields are familiar with this issue: fine to ‘scale the house’ for your show, but you can’t maintain big price differences if the quality difference between seating areas does not justify it in the minds of ticket-buyers.

And so, yes, the move can be a sensible one from the estate’s point of view.

Share:

  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

Related

Filed Under: issues

Comments

  1. C.E. Petit says

    March 15, 2016 at 9:18 am

    Not even close on the public domain date — works published in the US before 01 Jan 1978 have a flat 95-year term, not a term related to the author’s lifetime. To Kill a Mockingbird will enter the public domain on 01 Jan 2056 (95 years after publication in 1960, moved to 01 January of the next calendar year). That’s still quite a while from now, but a thirty-year difference from what is stated…

    Reply
    • Michael Rushton says

      March 15, 2016 at 9:23 am

      I happily stand corrected.

      Reply

Trackbacks

  1. Top Posts From AJBlogs 03.14.16 – ArtsJournal says:
    March 14, 2016 at 11:49 pm

    […] or some other reason intrudes. … read more AJBlog: Real Clear Arts Published 2016-03-14 No more pocket versions of To Kill A Mockingbird The estate of Harper Lee has decided to end its relationship with Hachette publishers, which was […]

    [WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The comment’s server IP (66.33.193.103) doesn’t match the comment’s URL host IP (66.33.193.74) and so is spam.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Michael Rushton

Michael Rushton taught in the Arts Administration programs at Indiana University, and lives in Bloomington. An economist by training, he has published widely on such topics as public funding of the … MORE

About For What It’s Worth

What’s the price? Everything has one; admission, subscriptions, memberships, special exhibitions, box seats, refreshments, souvenirs, and on and on – a full menu. What the price is matters. Generally, nonprofit arts organizations in the US receive about half of their revenue as “earned income,” and … [Read More...]

Archives

Recent Comments

  • Carlo on What to do with the NEA? Make it Conservative?: “The Kennedy Center is offering $25 tickets in only select orchestra seating for the performances of Washington National Opera: Porgy…” May 20, 14:17
  • Carlo on Art in Turbulent Times: “The Kennedy Center today is selling discounted tickets for the Washington Opera for $20.” May 1, 21:31
  • Montague Gammon III on Art in Turbulent Times: “We would like to think that a Trumped Kennedy Center would experience a significant downturn in attendance, but we should…” Apr 22, 05:51
  • Ed Comet on What do to with the NEA? Pull the plug?: “The author has gone to the Grand Canyon with a magnifying glass, and found the rocks uninteresting.. The NEA does…” Apr 12, 16:42
  • Brtian Newhouse on What do to with the NEA? Pull the plug?: “I think that for arts patronage to work, there has to be some consensus that the activities of making and…” Apr 12, 14:28
Return to top of page

an ArtsJournal blog

This blog published under a Creative Commons license

Copyright © 2025 · Magazine Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in