tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-872447660964013545.post3151023840580680654..comments2024-03-18T22:39:50.137-07:00Comments on A Kindle World blog: Kindle News Roundup: Reactions to Kindle Cloud Reader and Price-Fixing LawsuitAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05109282436243758435noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-872447660964013545.post-44191470283394875152011-08-17T06:14:11.445-07:002011-08-17T06:14:11.445-07:00Gads, Anonymousn - I wrote the initial reply with ...Gads, Anonymousn - I wrote the initial reply with 1/3 rather than 30% but you'll know what I meant. It's late here. Here it is again.<br /><br />That's a good point about the word choice w/o the modifying "net" (although I also used the word 'profit" in each case, but it's not the "same mistake" since the others MEAN that Apple wants 30% of what the vendors sell something for BUT they don't know that Amazon must give 70% to the publishers and that Apple is demanding the entire profit when Big5 publisher books are involved (most). <br /><br /> That's different from subscription publishers who give Apple 30% while retaining 70%<br /><br />So they leave readers with the idea that Apple wants 30% of the e-book vendors' TAKE from the deal. Some insist this is 'fair' because of that interpretation. Some think it "too much" but ANYone would consider 100% of profit too much.<br /><br />Amazon sells a book for $100, gets 30% profit from it, or net revenue of $30, after the publisher gets the other $70.<br /><br />Apple wants that entire $30 which constitutes 30% of sale and 100% of Amazon's profit.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05109282436243758435noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-872447660964013545.post-31371380330486199872011-08-17T03:36:05.940-07:002011-08-17T03:36:05.940-07:00you make the same mistake the sites you refer to m...you make the same mistake the sites you refer to make, and that's that you confuse the terms "profit" and "revenue". Revenue is the total income, profit the margin on that income after subtracting cost.<br />So Apple demands 30% of revenue, which happens to (and Apple knows that full well) equate to 100% of profit.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-872447660964013545.post-65120675939373860732011-08-17T01:43:49.132-07:002011-08-17T01:43:49.132-07:00Glad that was useful, Corneliu!
The antagonism to...Glad that was useful, Corneliu!<br /><br />The antagonism toward Flash (for some good reasons such as some instability with iOS devices) was to be fixed by the HTML5 focus, but I don't think he intended this other effect.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05109282436243758435noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-872447660964013545.post-58847073386926158922011-08-17T01:21:43.292-07:002011-08-17T01:21:43.292-07:00Great article, chock-full of information. Thanks!
...Great article, chock-full of information. Thanks!<br /><br />One thing is certain, things have just changed. People have opened their eyes and saw that the native apps aren't the only way. This may have a larger or smaller impact, but there will be an impact.<br /><br />I can't wait to see what will Apple do next. Steve Jobs can't just ban HTML5 like he did with Flash.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05724717613575721151noreply@blogger.com