On Oct 6, 2011, at 3:38 PM, Nat Russo wrote: > Ahh, sweet freedom :) > > Is length the reason they decided to split it up in paperback form, Ray? (It > was a great marketing decision... As an 11-year old boy trying to decide > where to spend his hard-earned paper route money, I had a personal rule of > only buying books that were in series and had cool cover art :). When I saw > "Magician: Apprentice" sitting next to "Magician: Master", it passed my major > criteria, so I bought both of them.) > > You'll be happy to know my bar has been raised considerably higher from when > I was 11, and you still pass :) (as does Magician, which I just finished > reading for the umpteenth time a couple of days ago. That book never gets > old.) >
In the US, the logic was, "We can't charge a bestseller price for the book if it's not a bestseller. In the UK, they had indicators there wouldn't be much price resistance, so it was 1 volume there, and 2 volumes in the US. Best,R.E.F. ---- www.crydee.com Never attribute to malice what can satisfactorily be explained away by stupidity.
