~Blog Poll~ E-book Pricing: Where's the Sweet Spot?

This is a topic that I've seen discussed in multiple forums, usually in a general sense. Since I write romance I want to know what romance readers/writers think. 

What are you willing to pay for a romance eBook? What price makes you click away and look for something else? Do you feel eBooks should be free since there's no printing involved? 

Personally, I won't pay more than $5 and I am more likely to pay that for a historical romance than any other genre. Money's always tight around here, though, so it's unlikely I'll even pay that much unless it's for an author I already adore. I definitely think eBooks should be priced considerably lower than their print counterparts. 

What are your thoughts? What is the perfect price for a romance eBook? $4.99? Less than that? Free? Please take a moment to vote in my little blog poll (top right in the sidebar on the blogspot end of my blog) or comment here. 

To my readers/followers outside the US, I apologize for the USD specificity of the poll. I welcome your comments on the subject of eBook pricing. ☺

Edited 8/21/2012, 10:27am to add: 

I just saw this interesting article, shared by a friend on facebook...

Big Publishers, High Prices Dominate E-Book Best-Sellers (Forbes.com)

What do you think?

♥Happy reading, writing, and blogging!!♥

There's a jukebox in my head. It's currently playing
♫♪ Daughtry ~ Breakdown

♥Romance Opinions ♥ Romance: Selling Point or Turn Off?

Several months ago I asked a question on facebook that got me thinking (as if I wasn't already thinking to have asked the Q in the first place). Here is my exact post: 

"{I'm gonna ask this here, since my friends list is made up of all types of friends, not just people who know me for my writing.} Hubby says I'm doing myself a disservice by calling my books romances. What do you think? Do you immediately lose interest when the term "romance" (in reference to a book) is mentioned? Why or why not?"

The responses I got were varied and interesting ... and perhaps something I already knew. However, they still made me think. 

For example, one person mentioned that 80% of book sales are romances. True, and when looked at that way, it's hard to think calling my books romances would be a disservice. 

However, more than one (women, mind you) mentioned that they avoid the romance sections in stores and libraries. Whether it was the assumption the books contain graphic sex or unrealistic plots, the reaction was the same: Complete avoidance. 

One admitted that if we weren't published with the same company, she never would have picked up one of my books. But she did and loved them because "they are SO much more than romance." 

Which is exactly why my husband says I'm doing myself a disservice. In addition, he says calling them romances misleads romance fans into expecting a typical romance and they may not like finding out otherwise.

When I asked the question again, later, a discussion ensued in regard to the definition of historical fiction (HF) vs. literary fiction (LF). It was determined then that my books do not qualify as HF since HF typically focuses around a specific historical event or person. LF seems to be more character-driven, in-depth, psychological offerings. It appears that, in the broadest sense, my books are literary fiction with a historical setting.

I seem to have stumbled into my own genre. And that makes marketing a nearly impossible task. Books are required to be listed as something in all the retail stores. I figured "clean historical romance" or "clean Regency romance" best describes my books even though not everyone agrees with the "clean" assessment...but that's another post entirely. ☺

What are your thoughts on this subject? Is the word "romance" a turn off? Why or why not? 

There's a jukebox in my head. It's currently playing
♫♪ Faye Wong ~ Eyes On Me 

♥ Romance Opinions ♥ Sweet, Traditional, & Clean: What's the difference?

Sweet, to me, implies a certain lightness to the story. I sometimes refer to it as fluffy, though not everyone considers that a positive thing. I don't think it's a bad thing, just a different type of story. There's nothing too traumatic happening and definitely nothing graphic. Very little profanity or violence, if any.

Traditional romance I typically consider any romance that leaves the sexual details to the imagination, regardless of genre. That most traditional romances are also sweet isn't much of a coincidence; they go hand-in-hand, for the most part. However, I've read a few (and written a few) that leave out the sex (or at least the details) but touch on subjects that make your stomach clench. Hard to refer to stories like that as sweet.

Then there's clean romance which I pretty much consider the same as traditional. I've noticed some are offended by the term clean, however, as they believe it implies sexually detailed romances are then dirty. To each his own. I call mine clean because the sexual details aren't there but sweet they are not. 

The only difference I see is in each person's opinion. I view clean, sweet, and traditional in much the same light. But when the storyline gets into rough territory, I have a hard time calling it sweet.

There's a discussion on this subject in the Clean Romances group on Goodreads. (Funny, since I actually wrote this blog post back in December '11 and never published it.)

Then there are the differing views on "clean" in general. How much detail is too much detail before it's left the realm of clean and turned into something else? But that's another blog post entirely. lol

This is all just my own opinion and I'm sure not everyone would agree. So tell me, what do you think?

~Jaimey

Traditional Regency Romance...with an Edge 

www.jaimeygrant.com 

Fans of Romance: Opinions Needed

♪♫♪ Now playing in Jaimey's mind: Daughtry ~ Breakdown ♫♪♫ 

Over on the Affaire de Coeur blog, TJ MacKay asked a question:

"What do YOU think about the prevalence of graphic sex in books today? Do you like it just the way it is or would you prefer more tame romance offerings?"

TJ's goal is to raise awareness that, although the big publishers believe otherwise, there is a market for clean, sweet, or traditional-style romance offerings. As a writer of clean romance, I hope this blog post and the article set to appear in the Jan-Feb issue of AdC magazine will bring out other writers of clean romance, as well as open some doors in the publishing world. 

Please take a moment to click on over and weigh in on this subject so close to my heart. Thank you! 

Reviews and the Reader

I have been curious for quite some time now about reviews. I like to write reviews myself but wonder how much they actually influence a potential buyer. So that is the theme of my second blog poll.

How much importance do you place on reviews? (The poll to the right is anonymous; please be completely honest. If you'd like to share your views, comments are welcome. If there is an answer missing that you feel should be added, let me know.)

On the one hand, I tend to be influenced by the negative ones. If the negative review is poorly written, attacks the author, or is so vague it could have been written for a dozen other products, I ignore it. I have recently found reviews written by people who haven't even read the book. How ethical is that? This gives me a much more cynical outlook of chronically negative reviewers and their reviews. Conversely, I become more interested in the product being slammed.

On the other hand, positive reviews can be off-putting for me. Nobody's perfect. If all the reviews claim perfection the hype builds until the book cannot possibly live up to it.

I try to take each review as it comes, make an educated decision based on the reviewer's review history and the tone of the review.

How much importance do I place on reviews? It all depends on the reviewer, so I would say moderate importance. Please note, this does not mean I would not buy a book with no reviews. If the book sounds interesting, reviews, or the lack thereof, mean nothing.

So that's my opinion. What's yours?