Is an author of a popular textbook, for example griffiths, wealthy?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the financial success of authors of popular physics textbooks, particularly focusing on the royalties they earn from sales. Participants explore the economics of textbook publishing, the popularity of specific authors like Griffiths and Stewart, and the broader implications of textbook pricing and usage in educational contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants speculate on the earnings of textbook authors, suggesting that popular authors like Griffiths might earn significant royalties, potentially around $100K per year for best-selling introductory texts.
  • Others provide estimates of royalties per copy sold, indicating a range of $2-$5, depending on sales volume and negotiation skills.
  • One participant mentions that the market for graduate texts is less lucrative due to lower sales numbers, despite potentially higher royalties per book.
  • There is a discussion about the widespread use of certain textbooks, with claims that a large percentage of students rely on them, suggesting a strong market presence.
  • Participants express admiration for Griffiths' textbooks, describing them as masterpieces, which may imply a belief that he deserves financial success.
  • James Stewart's financial success is highlighted, with anecdotes about his wealth and the luxurious home he built, suggesting that some textbook authors can achieve significant wealth.
  • Humor is introduced with a suggestion to create a movie series about calculus, indicating a lighthearted take on the topic of textbook popularity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying opinions on the financial success of textbook authors, with some agreeing that authors like Griffiths and Stewart are likely wealthy, while others question the extent of their earnings. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the exact financial figures and the overall economics of textbook publishing.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes references to external articles and personal anecdotes, which may introduce varying assumptions about textbook sales and royalties. The estimates provided are based on individual interpretations and may not reflect a comprehensive analysis of the textbook market.

rar0308
Messages
55
Reaction score
0
For example
Griffiths' Electrodynamics, and Quantum Mechanics seems popular.
and the prices are expensive.
I'm curious about how much money the author make by selling these books.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Bassed on this article, I would say the publishers are getting truly wealthy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textbook

and here's one authors experience:

http://www.mountainplains.org/articles/2000/opinion/writing_a_textbook.html

and here:

http://wps.aw.com/aw_perloff_microcalc_1/76/19539/5002058.cw/content/index.html

and google books has this reference:

http://books.google.com/books?id=62...age&q=author college textbook royalty&f=false

look for the Your Royalties section for breakdown of typical royalty payments. They say from 2% to 20% of the book price. Best selling introductory textbook authors canmake about $100K per year in royalties.

so it looks like they get 15% of the wholesale price of the book which my guess probably amounts to 5% when its sold to students.

Google search on "author college textbook royalty" to see more references.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hmm... one of the engineering professors at my school has written a crap load of textbooks. Now I feel the need to go ask him how much he makes from it and report back, hah!
 
James Stewart (the author of that abomination of a calculus textbook) made a pretty profit from his books.
 
... but probably not as much as J K Rowling. Somebody needs to make a 7-movie series on calculus. Plus a prequel on pre-calculus, of course.

Oh wait - isn't that what MOOCs are doing already? :smile:
 
Royalties are in the $2-$5 per copy range. The structure for this is very complicated and depends on the number of books sold. I expect Griffiths is closer to $2, but you never know - he may be a great negotiator.

There are 6000-7000 physics grads per year. Perhaps as many as half use Griffiths, and perhaps 60% buy new copies. So that works out to $4000 per year.

For graduate texts, the economics is even worse: the publisher does pay a little more per book, but the number of books sold is much, much less.

The money is in introductory texts. But it's a tough market to break into, and there is pressure for new editions all the time, so it's a substantial amount of work to keep current.
 
jgens said:
James Stewart (the author of that abomination of a calculus textbook) made a pretty profit from his books.

I don't know why everyone uses his precalculus and calculus books.
 
jgens said:
James Stewart (the author of that abomination of a calculus textbook) made a pretty profit from his books.

That's an understatement. Stewart's home, Integral House, is reported to have cost $24 million to build, which doesn't include the $5.4 million he paid to tear down an existing house on the site. That's a lot of royalties for any kind of book.
 
SteamKing said:
That's an understatement. Stewart's home, Integral House, is reported to have cost $24 million to build, which doesn't include the $5.4 million he paid to tear down an existing house on the site. That's a lot of royalties for any kind of book.

wow looks like you're right. I found this story:
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2011/02/04/the_house_that_math_built.html

a 150-seat concert hall? madness!
 
  • #10
I mean.. 90% of Canadian Students and 70% of American students.. that's not just "widely used." That's "almost exclusively used."
 
  • #11
Griffiths deserves to be rich. His EM book is one of the absolute masterpieces of physics textbook writing.
 
  • #12
WannabeNewton said:
Griffiths deserves to be rich. His EM book is one of the absolute masterpieces of physics textbook writing.

True, and his QM book too. It's much more mathematically rigorous than any other book I've found at this level and still gives a lot of the intuition. Many of the quantum mechanics books authors should be arrested for not knowing how to use simple mathematics correctly, making QM even more confusing than it already is...
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
7K