I really like Chris Anderson’s books Free and The Long Tail. For me there is a small paradox between the two that I have been wanting to write about for some time. Let’s look at this from the perspective of a book publisher.

This publisher has read The Long Tail and is aware that there is an increasing ability to sell what used to be niche products and that their total sales may be increasingly comprised of these niche products. Suppose this publisher has a book called Used to be Cool that at one point in time sold well, but no longer does. In the past the publisher might have let the book go out of print; however, with the knowledge of The Long Tail, the publisher lets the book go into print on demand knowing that as time goes by small quantities of this book will sell. This, in aggregate with other similar books will equal a lot of sales.

Enter Free. The author of Used to be Cool has read Free and is convinced that the publisher should give away a free digital version of her book in order to increase her visibility as an author. She is excited about the book and believes that many more people would access it (and perhaps even buy print copies) if a free digital version were available. The publisher sees that “free” could possibily help them make money in this particular case, but wonder about the precedent it would create.

This publisher has more than 1,000 books similar to Used to be Cool. If they make digital versions available, charge just $3.00 per book, and  each book sells 1 copy a month (that’s the long tail isn’t it?) they will make $36,000 each year on these books. And that’s mostly profit because there is nothing to print/ship/store.

What if they make these 1,000 books available for free? One line of logic says that more people will find out about the books and that perhaps 1 additional person each month will buy a print copy who would not have otherwise bought it, because of the free version. Another line of logic says that giving digital versions away for free would cannibalize the minimal amount of sales the books already have. The former argument is the one I believe to be correct; however, I can understand why a publisher would be nervous about the gamble.

If the future of business is selling less of more, how concerned should publishers be about giving away that “more”?