Here’s something interesting: Many of the books on the NYT hardcover business best sellers list are causing a nice spillover effect on the paperback business best sellers list.

Consider these hardcover books:

1. THE BIG SHORT, by Michael Lewis (2010)
4. OUTLIERS, by Malcolm Gladwell (2008)
9. SUPERFREAKONOMICS, by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner (2009)

And these much older paperbacks that have been dragged back onto the paperback business list:

1. THE BLIND SIDE, by Michael Lewis (2006)
2. THE TIPPING POINT, by Malcolm Gladwell (2000)
3. FREAKONOMICS, by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner (2005)
4. LIAR’S POKER, by Michael Lewis  (1989)

In addition to the above, Malcolm Gladwell’s BLINK (2005) is #9 on the regular paperback non fiction list.

Lewis has 3 books on the business list, and Outliers is still #12 on the NYT hardcover nonfiction list. The Blind Side is #1 on the Times paperback nonfiction list.

Category: Retail

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

3 Responses to “Hardcover Best Sellers Paperback Spillover Effect”

  1. VennData says:

    “…other titles you may enjoy…” CLICK.

    Glenn Beck’s “Arguing with Idiots” must have driven those “Politics for Dummies” I’ve seen people reading.

  2. super_trooper says:

    Looks more like the paperback list indicates that few great books have been written in the last few years.

  3. vachon says:

    There are a lot of good business books out there but not nearly enough. I spent a first mortgage on 2 hardcover business books at Books A Million 2 weekends ago. Unfortunately, the softcover business books didn’t look interesting and were badly dated.

    By contrast, the hardcover political books looked truly awful, but the selection of political softcover books was excellent. Go figure.