At least those people who choose to can lower their costs by consuming the same amount of books that they used to. I personally am all for getting more value for my money, and this post inched me a bit closer to getting a kindle. I’m an avid reader, but I have arm pain due to a neck injury, and I think the kindle is much more ergonomic! Also, I love the idea of instant gratification

i’m saying that the facts indicate that there is a higher probability that kindle owners are spending as much or more on books, than they are spending less.
Yes, they are getting more value for their money – however, their expenses due to books are not going down.

For the above statement to have ANY merit, we’d need to compare the number of books that KINDLE OWNERS purchased before owning a kindle to the number of books that KINDLE OWNERS purchased after owning a kindle.

It’s called correlation, not causation.

but even if someone is reading 2.6 times more than they did, whether you realize it or not, they ARE saving money, and the kindle IS effectively free for them once they hit the break-even point, even if theyre spending more now than they used to.

the fact theyre reading more (and thus, spending more) doesnt change that fact. its the same as the discount card i discussed. suppose someone normally only bought $200 worth of books a year. they then get pitched for the discount card (the hypothetical $50/20% card) and decide to get one, and as a result, instead of just hitting the bookstore now and then, they make it part of their routine and start shopping there every week. at the end of the next year, theyve bought $600 worth of books, 3 times what they did before… but that is irrelevant, the card was STILL effectively free the moment they crossed the $500 mark.

reading more or less than they did before is immaterial when determining whether or not the kindle has paid for itself… the only thing that matters is, did they save as much as the purchase price of the kindle over the retail cost of the books they DID buy. if the answer is “yes” then the kindle WAS free. the fact they may have read 2.6 times more than before, and thus spent more, is a completely different issue that has nothing to do with the break-even cost of the kindle itself.

you’re obviously not one of the kindle owners who’s buying 2.6 times the books they were earlier.

I wonder what percentage of kindle owners spend less on books after buying a Kindle, what percentage spend the same, and what percentage spend more.

B1 = some set of books
B2 = some set of books
K = amazon kindle

break-even point is:

cost in kindle store (B1) + cost (K) = cost in retail (B2);
B1 = B2; (the set is identical)
it follows that:
cost (K) = 0;

if that makes more sense.

thats easy… i spent almost the same amount (within $30) in the 7 months preceeding the kindle on books alone as i did in the 7 months after purchasing the kindle INCLUDING the cost of the kindle. (and yes, i do keep track. yay for ms money and online banking ). the kindle really DID pay for itself in a little under 7 months. i read at a steady rate (almost always 120 books a year, +/- 5 or so books), and im currently right on track for that target for the 12 months after buying the kindle… except i will have spent less (a LOT less as it turns out) buying kindle books pver that 12 months even including the cost of the unit itself.

its very simple: there is a REAL, calculable set of book purchases whereby if you summed the cost of those books in kindle format (CBK) and add the cost of the kindle reader (CKR), the amount is EQUAL to the summed cost of those SAME books at retail (CBR). in other words:

CBK + CKR = CBR

since the books in this equation are the SAME, you can cancel them out (you purchased and read the exact same set of books under either option) so what youre left with in the equation is:

CKR = 0

in other words, the cost of the kindle reader was: zero. free. gratis.

this is EXACTLY the same, in economic, practical, and mathematical terms, as the “book club” discount cards some retailers sell and how you determine their break-even point.

for the purposes of simplification, lets say the barnes and nobel card costs $50 and it gives you a flat 10% discount across the board on book purchases. (i know that isnt how it works, this is just for easy math’s sake.) the card has a break-even point, whereby at that point you are indifferent to having the card or not, in other words you will have spent EXACTLY the same amount for EXACTLY the same merchandise, with or without the card.

in the example case, that amount is $500 pre-discount worth of books. at that point, with the card your cost is $450 + $50 for the card, versus $500 for the same books without the card. if you buy less than $500 worth, you wasted your money. if you buy more than that, you make money off the deal. at $500, the card was, in effect, free. it paid for itself. after that point, it is BETTER than free, as it actively saves/makes you money. (this ignores the utility value of that $50 over the period of time it takes to buy $500 worth of merch. its an issue, but it complicates things somewhat, and isnt germaine to the arguement.)

in this respect, the kindle reader is IDENTICAL to a (very) expensive book club card. one that carries a highly variable discount, which makes it harder to calculate when it has paid for itself. but it IS possible to calculate, and it IS effectively free at that point, and it DOES effectively make/save you money past that point. period.