> I would rather pay them than pay the publisher for them to only get a small cut.
Publishers aren't just stealing money that should go to authors. We can debate percentages and such, but buying a book also pays the editors (who any author will tell you are just as important to a book as they are), the typesetters, the designers, etc.
For academic books, which are after all a substantial part of Anna, the publishers aren’t usually paying the editors if the book is a collection of papers. The editors got paid by the grant funding for the project that produced the research.
Moreover, many respected academic publishers no longer provide proofreading or typesetting: they expect the authors or editors to commission their own proofreading, and the editors to just send in a PDF with camera-ready output.
For monographs, the “editor” that the publisher provides is only there to guide the author in producing their own camera-ready output, and does not actually do any work on the contents of the book. The publisher will hand off the manuscript to 1–2 peer reviewers, but those peer reviewers are unpaid.
Obviously publishers provide some amount of value, but for a subset of the media I consume they are not great.
In the more indie fantasy scene authors often pay for editing themselves out of pocket. Often the only "publisher" they can get is direct publishing through Kindle, which then locks them into exclusivity with Kindle/Amazon. It's frankly disgusting but it's a way to help them get paid. I'd rather kick these people $20-50 directly than do anything else.
Publishers aren't just stealing money that should go to authors. We can debate percentages and such, but buying a book also pays the editors (who any author will tell you are just as important to a book as they are), the typesetters, the designers, etc.