Why no hardcovers?

[Paul Mackin]

On 6/27/2012 11:20 AM, Dave Monroe wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> Bekah--Your preference for quality soft covers when available reminds me of
>> the 1973 release of GR.  An order of magnitude more people must have bought
>> the soft cover than the hard, which helps explain why collectors pay more
>> for the latter.  (other reason is the softs fall apart--mine sure did) But
>> what I'm wondering is who made the decision do it this way.  It was an
>> unusual way to go. Was it an experiment to see the bottom line effect?  Did
>> TP have a role?  Don't suppose anyone knows, but I do wonder.
> There were only 5000 copies of the hardcover printed.  The paperback
> 1st ed. was released simultaneously.  Viking's decision, one would
> assume.
>
thanks, Dave, that is sort of what I would have figured.  Actually, info 
Ive relayed before, my bookstore hadn't put out the hardcovers yet so I 
had to choose the paper cover.  Probably would had anyway. (if avaiblabe)

P