tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-872447660964013545.post4166491114224753676..comments2024-03-18T22:39:50.137-07:00Comments on A Kindle World blog: Amazon plays hardball to keep lower pricing optionAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05109282436243758435noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-872447660964013545.post-89849524495530794762010-04-20T12:17:25.981-07:002010-04-20T12:17:25.981-07:00Jim,
Many thanks for the alert to the article at ...Jim,<br /> Many thanks for the alert to the article at fair.org. I'll include that in a blog entry -- and didn't you love the characterization of Bezos made from hearsay along with the rosiest treatment I've ever seen of Jobs dealing with partners? <br /><br /> Re the publishers, for a $26 book -- not using Rich's figures but it was good to go with hers since she was espousing the publisher line and taking their info from the negotiations, presenting those from their perspective, and even then the case is made:<br /><br /> On a $26 publisher-set-list price book, the traditional wholesaler arrangement would have meant about $13 of it going to the publisher even when the bookstore/retailer charged only $10 for the book as Amazon did, who treated bestsellers on the NYTimes list as loss-leaders.<br /><br /> As Steve Jobs inserted into his Agency agreements with the Big5 later, he wanted, after all that, the ability to sell the 'hottest' books (apparently the first 10 of the NYT bestsellers) for only $10 and did get that. In other words, he did want to 'devalue' those (in the publishers' eyes, $10 was a devaluing) and got it. <br /><br /> So, the publishers get $7 with that instead of the $13 that Amazon did pay them under the wholesaler arrangement, meaning there was MORE money for the auuthors from the older non-agency arrangement as they affected the most popular books.<br /><br /> Yet they carry on about wanting the authors to get more.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05109282436243758435noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-872447660964013545.post-28759514870094416212010-04-20T11:53:45.732-07:002010-04-20T11:53:45.732-07:00Mary, thanks. I thought I had replied to this but...Mary, thanks. I thought I had replied to this but apparently not (though blogger.com has been buggy about showing comments, including mine lately, and one that was just made, in fact and maybe that one will show up after I type this).<br /><br />But it's a good point that we have impulses to buy a book after hearing about it while watching a show, etc., and once that impulse is ignored because the book isn't made available, then it may just not be there in the future.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05109282436243758435noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-872447660964013545.post-52656217817707314042010-04-20T07:47:02.838-07:002010-04-20T07:47:02.838-07:00See my take on Ken Auletta's discussion of the...See my take on Ken Auletta's discussion of the Amazon/Apple war:<br /><br />http://www.fair.org/blog/2010/04/20/unlike-amazon-publishers-understand-authors-and-how-to-rip-them-off/Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10708729824689433966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-872447660964013545.post-4218457896189048872010-03-23T09:33:05.630-07:002010-03-23T09:33:05.630-07:00What Bufo says. Nice piece, Andrys.
There's a...What Bufo says. Nice piece, Andrys.<br /><br />There's another bit to your argument that the e-book buyer just isn't the hardcover customer. Publishers are somewhat shooting themselves in the foot with 'embargoes' as they are called in the world of electronic journals (the practice of delaying availability). In much of the public discussion of the fabulous Whispernet, it has been construed as a 'service' to the customer. Make no mistake, it does serve Amazon hugely. Len Edgerly's recent author-guest on the 'Chronicles' made the point cleverly when she said she'd love to benefit from purchases made by people who'd had a few drinks. But what really makes a drunk click 'Buy'? It's that author on BookSpan, or Charlie Rose, or The Daily Show, talking about their just-released book. But some of those books turn out to be cr@p and end up as heaps of remainders; so like film production companies on opening weekend of a film, publishers need to capitalize on their own hype -- before word gets out about which books suck. Memory fades with the passing of time, too. Many who would be inclined to click 'Buy' when a book is newly released will completely forget about it over time. The publishers who make their new releases available in e right away will eat the lunch of those who embargo. I suspect that some form of stepped pricing may well be the answer here. But e with DRM really does need to be significantly cheaper than hardcover, all the same. (We don't all have to re-buy the White Album when we dump our Samsung CD player for a JVC, after all.) And as an e-book 'purchaser', no way do I want to subsidize a house's print remainders. So even given the broad 'solution' of stepped pricing, there will be details to work out. There may be no perfect model; but there might be a lesser evil.<br /><br />Regards,<br />MaryAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-872447660964013545.post-40231738768984546042010-03-19T16:40:06.160-07:002010-03-19T16:40:06.160-07:00Bufo,
I think you're exactly right.
He wouldn...Bufo,<br />I think you're exactly right.<br /><br />He wouldn't compete on price on the low side so he's made everyone come to his heights for that. That's power for you. They're like lemmings, as ebook sales decrease after the initial interest.<br /><br />Jan of TheKindleReader tweeted last night that after using Kindle for Mac on her computer, she will be reading ebooks on the Kindle.<br /><br />That's definitely how I feel. I love to look AT it on my netbook (which has a beautiful matte-finish display and I can have the windows fill up the screen when browsing (no tabs, no headers)) but when reading a book in sequential or serial fashion, there's little relief from little black chracter lines against WHITE even when I dim it to lowest point. It's good for about 20 minutes to half an hour for me though i can surf the web for hours on end with random jumping around that moves and relaxes the eyes with changes in foreground and backgrond and subject matter.<br /><br />But that pricing -- there's a lot we can buy when ignoring the too-costly books.<br /><br />It'll be interesting to watch.<br /><br />Thanks for visiting!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05109282436243758435noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-872447660964013545.post-59921528271762171032010-03-19T08:17:53.230-07:002010-03-19T08:17:53.230-07:00Nice article, Andrys!
I think a key point in all ...Nice article, Andrys!<br /><br />I think a key point in all this is that Apple doesn't really care about selling books as much as they do about selling iPads. If e-books become less attractive, that hurts the Kindle...but not the iPad as much (since people will have that for other purposes as well, and in many cases, reading will not be the primary purpose).Bufo Calvinhttp://ilmk.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-872447660964013545.post-16636872091001160262010-03-18T19:24:26.757-07:002010-03-18T19:24:26.757-07:00newwine,
Thanks!
It seems that the Technology...newwine,<br /><br /> Thanks!<br /> It seems that the Technology columns by Rich or Stone don't have a comments area, usually. Odd. I imagine it's a hassle since people feel so strongly about everything.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05109282436243758435noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-872447660964013545.post-70615199316724021102010-03-18T19:09:56.139-07:002010-03-18T19:09:56.139-07:00Interesting that NYT online is also not allowing c...Interesting that NYT online is also not allowing comments on this article...good piece, Andrys.newwinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01067437471456354376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-872447660964013545.post-86623495029763626412010-03-18T16:43:34.660-07:002010-03-18T16:43:34.660-07:00That's a great description, Eric.
Maybe Ran...That's a great description, Eric.<br /><br /> Maybe Random House will do okay too. <br /><br /> The story reads as if the leakers wanted (and got) a mouthpiece who would warn the world that Amazon Vader was about to destroy the e-book world as we know it. Getting readers and watchers into the 'right' mindset... for the end goal.<br /><br /> But the NYT duo did write, if with less alarming language, about what Apple is "requiring."<br /><br /><br /><br /> That may happen but at Amazon's instigation.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05109282436243758435noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-872447660964013545.post-81450031569002321172010-03-18T16:28:37.530-07:002010-03-18T16:28:37.530-07:00Okay, it's not just me then. Thanks. It seems ...Okay, it's not just me then. Thanks. It seems like the NYT has fallen into the reality distortion field that hovers around Apple these days.<br /><br />The fact they were on stage at the iPad launch couldn't possibly have anything to do with it, I'm sure.<br /><br />If the publishing industry is so desparate that they're letting some company (who uses them merely as a checkbox on a feature list) come in and entirely disrupt their business model, well, they get what's coming to them. <br /><br />I have a feeling when all's said and done, the only publishers that will escape this shift unscathed will be Baen and O'Reilly.Erichttp://www.leadpushers.com/incunabulanoreply@blogger.com