So the people at Champagne Books work for free, then. That's a very useful business model to have. I'm sorry that you think I'm lying about what happened to the print market in the 1990's, Kerry. I'm sorry that you think large publishers give out loads and loads of six figure advances (they don't.) But the simple reality is that the large publishers had to build large Champagne Books imprints of full and part-time employees to add to their existing companies and staff and have that imprint digitize thousands of books coming out that year and thousands and thousands of backlist titles as quickly as possible. That costs money, whether the people and companies involved work at the publisher's home office or are spread out across the country. Unless people are self-publishing, people do not do this work for free. Many small print publishers will be happy to tell you that digitizing their lists was an expensive cost, which is why a lot of them have had to do it slowly or wait quite awhile. I don't know if your Canadian publisher has a government subsidy grant to help out, but even with that, they do have expenses including electronic accounting expenses and the like, which are overhead. E-books are not made and managed by magical fairies who work for flower nectar. Consequently, there was a large capital outlay that had to be made to get e-books off the ground in the oughts. Which is why Amazon sold e-books at a loss. Which is why publishers spent that money to get staff and production in place when e-book sales were only 1% and thus lost them money. Which is why your publisher, which produces trade paperbacks, started with only four e-books in 2005 and built from there. They are now in the black on e-books, but that didn't mean that they started in the black or had no start-up costs for it. And they are continuing with a mix of e-books and trade paperbacks, which allows them maximum selling opportunity. If they go to e-books only, they should still do okay, as a small operation, especially as they have no mass market paperback audience and are only selling their wares to the top 25%. But that isn't a one size fits all for all of publishing. And it doesn't deal with the issue of access. As sales increase and costs go down after initial outlay, then the e-books on the entire list of publishers -- not just bestsellers -- lose less and less money and more of them start earning more and more money. This is what has occurred over the last seven years. This has effected print, but the bigger problems for the print market occurred some 15 years ago. A print book is not the same as a record which has to be played on a record player. But a book may become like a record over and over again if the market is only electronic and must be run only on equipment. That again means that people have to keep buying new and updated versions of equipment and new versions of e-books because their old e-books (records) won't work on the new equipment (MP3 players.) That's a significant cash outlay over time, and millions of people can't afford it. So if it happens, that is going to effect things and it's going to shrink the total audience, even if some e-publishers do well within it selling to the top 25%. I do not know why pointing out that labor, new hires and new infrastructure cost money and that millions of people cannot afford e-books are such threatening statements of fact. I am a big cheerleader for e-books. It's a greatly successful emerging market. But this insistence that e-books are utopia, that issues like fossil fuels-electricity issues, educational access, etc. are forbidden to be discussed or unimportant is getting old. And the statement that e-book sales are simply shifted print sales is factually incorrect. As has been pointed out many times by many people, price is not the sole factor -- hardcover sales were not cancelled out by cheaper mass market paperback sales over the last century. And again, the initial outlay needed for an individual to buy one e-book is fairly high over simply buying print. So the market factors are far more complicated than me Tarzan, you Jane. Which is presumably why your publisher still does print books for now. I believe that e-books greatly enrich society and grow the market for books. But I also believe that an electronic only market at this point in society and in the near future in the current economy and educational situation would greatly impoverish society and shrink the market for books. If you have an argument about that issue that is more than simply calling me a liar, or saying that your own publisher is doing fine so there, I am as always happy to hear it.