My preferred size of book is the US mass market format. It’s easy to hold, fits nicely into my handbag, and doesn’t strain my wrists when I read in bed. I’m less fond of UK paperbacks as they are larger and take up more space on my bookshelves. I also like hardbacks, although I hardly ever buy any as they are cost-prohibitive.
My pet peeve when it comes to book sizes is the trade paperback. I resent paying almost double for the same sort of story I can find in a mass market edition. I don’t see a huge difference in the quality of the paper in a trade paperback, and I fail to understand the appeal. Do customers really think they’re getting a superior book because they are paying so much more? Trade paperbacks are awkward. They’re more unwieldy than smaller formats and take up a lot more space. Hardbacks are also space-eaters, but at least I know their binding is more durable and they are likely to last longer than the average paperback.
The one time I make a reluctant exception to my anti-trade paperback stance is when it comes to airport editions. Airport editions (essentially trade paperbacks) of popular current hardback releases are available at Amazon Germany, as well as at airports. I’m not sure what legal loophole allows Amazon to sell them, but sell them they do, and often at extremely competitive prices. Many are only slightly more expensive that what I’d pay if I waited 10-12 months for the regular paperback edition to be released. Although I hate the size, I find myself getting sucked into buying particularly coveted titles, such as Karin Slaughter’s Genesis (US Title: Undone).
What do you think of trade paperbacks? Do they really offer better value for money, or are they a rip-off? Which is your preferred format?
{ 16 comments }
Yeah, I think I too prefer the mass market sized paperback, both from the ‘holding’ point of view, and price.
I find myself growing more annoyed when Trade paperbacks costs $14 and are barely 300 pages in length. One book I tried to read was barely 250 pages and again cost $14. These publishers need to get a clue because I refuse to spend money for a book that doesn’t have enough pages or words to hold my interest.
@Portia Da Costa The ‘holding’ point of view is really important, in my opinion. The mass market fits nicely into my hands.
@katiebabs Yep. I recently bought a trade paperback for about $14 and it was no longer than the average category romance. Never again!
I prefer to buy and read mass market, but I love to own hardbacks because they retain their non-creased state longer and I love the ritual of turning their pages. Also, when you talk about trade paperbacks, do you mean the small US-sized trade paperbacks, or the larger UK-sized ones? (We call them B-format and C-format here.) I find the larger trade paperbacks very awkward to hold when reading.
@Kat Good point, Kat. I forgot to mention the size difference in US and UK trade paperbacks. They both annoy me, actually. For example, I recently bought Deanna Raybourn’s ‘Silent on the Moor’ in US-sized trade paperback. While I enjoyed the book, I was not pleased that it cost so much more than the previous two in the series. The UK trade paperbacks are even more irritating because they are HUGE!
I’m not a fan of trade paperback either. However, I find myself buying more and more of them, because of the authors… I mean, it takes forever before the trade-size comes out in mass market
For hardcover, it usually takes 6months to a year… but for trade paperback? You actually have no idea when or if.
Trade paperbacks, the name says it all. Aren’t they meant to be pre-publication editions distributed within the trade and not overpriced rip-off copies of books we really want to read in mass market paperback? As an American, I grew up on Pocket Books (now owned by Simon & Schuster and originally based on UK’s Penguin Books)which are a perfect size at a perfect price. I am guilty of buying trade paperbacks if I want to read a book right NOW, but I hate their bulk and their price. The existence of trade paperbacks on the market delays the real paperback release of some books by up to a year. Size certainly matters and sometimes less is more.
@nath That’s an excellent point. For many books first released in trade paperback, you really don’t know when (or if) they will be reissued in mass market. C.J. Sansom’s Matthew Shardlake series is only available in trade paperback in the US. Same with Ariana Franklin.
@Trish Trade paperbacks are a money-making spin and don’t necessarily mean a superior story. Erin McCarthy’s ‘Hard & Fast’ is priced at $14.99 for a 294-page book. Sarah Parr’s ‘Renegade’ is a Zebra Debut and costs just $3.99 for 343 pages. While I enjoyed ‘Hard & Fast’ well enough, I preferred ‘Renegade’. The thing is, trade paperbacks must sell, otherwise publishers wouldn’t keep producing them. I just don’t understand why a reader would think a bigger format book is better. At the end of the day, it’s just a glorified paperback.
I know a lot of people do prefer trade paperbacks. The font is bigger and they claim the quality of the paper is nicer. That may be true, but I am with you and prefer mass market paperbacks. They just fit so much better, as you mentioned, and since they’re all the same size, they look neat on my shelves. If I want a quality book that’s going to last a long time, I’ll buy a hardcover, not a trade paperback.
I think most books are either trade or mass market when they go into paperback, not both, unless they are huge bestsellers.
UK paperbacks are crazy. There are really small ones, about the size of our mass market paperbacks, medium sized which can vary, and then gigantic hardcover sized paperbacks. I really prefer standardized sizes!
Agree with you on the airport editions. I love them because they’re basically cheaper versions of the hardback.
The cost of trade paperbacks definitely puts me off, especially when it’s for a debut (or new-to-me) author.
And yes, like Meghan, I’m not sure what’s up with the non-standardised sizes for UK paperback. I bought a Karen Chance earlier in the year, which was bigger than mmp but smaller than US trade (I think!) though it was priced the same as an mmp.
This is one of my favourite rants of all time, lol. I can see no reason for the trades except for the publishers to cash in on the release rush.
I actually find that trades damage much easier, even if you take care with your reading.
On a side note does anyone remember the mini-trades that the Americans pulled for a little while? I think Dark Demon by Christine Feehan was one? They were terrible! The worst quality books I have ever come across, I am a very careful reader – hello I am a second-hand book dealer – that was the first book I have ever had a spine warp on me. (Which had nothing to do with how much I disliked the book. lol)
Edie~Yes, I do remember those mini-trades. Horrible! That’s actually one of the few times I have actually been disgusted with a publisher and the “quality” of the book.
I prefer mmps; that’s practically all I buy. Trade paperbacks really scream “rip-off” to me. If I get them at all, it’s from the library.
@Meghan That’s true about UK paperbacks. There doesn’t seem to be a standard size. But I have noticed a trend towards larger format paperbacks, which I really don’t like. Perhaps they feel this justifies the ever-increasing prices.
@Li My only objection to the airport editions is their size. The price is usually pretty decent and a lot less than I would pay if I bought the hardback. I’m thrilled to have the new Karin Slaughter already but I dearly wish it wasn’t such an awkward shape.
@Edie @heidenkind Mini trades? I don’t remember those. Were they more expensive mass markets?
You missed the mini trades? You are so lucky! lol
They were about $3-4 dearer than MME at the time.
I suspect readers buy them not because they prefer larger formats (although some probably do) but because they can’t bear the wait for mass market.
@Kat That’s why I get sucked into buying Airport editions. Otherwise, I’d have to wait a year for the new Karin Slaughter and Chelsea Cain.