or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Penguin hopes to appease EU regulators by ending e-book deal with Apple
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Penguin hopes to appease EU regulators by ending e-book deal with Apple

post #1 of 37
Thread Starter 
The nearly year and a half-long ebook antitrust investigation involving Apple and a handful of large publishers appears near an end, as Pearson's Penguin unit has offered to the European Commission to end the deals it made with Apple over ebook prices.

books


Penguin has offered to end "most-favored nation" ? which kept rival booksellers from selling ebooks at a lower price point than Apple ? for five years, according to Reuters. The agreement will also allow retailers to set prices and discounts for two years, as is the case with the other publishers that have settled with the Commission.

Penguin is the last publisher still negotiating with the Commission, as Apple and the other accused publishers reached a settlement in December.

In December of 2011, the Commission began looking into allegations of illegal agreements between Apple, Hachette Livre, Penguin, Harper Collins, Simon & Schuster, and Verlagsgruppe Georg von Holzbrinck. Apple, initially, was reluctant to settle, but the iBook seller eventually softened its stance.

The ending of the "agency model" pricing ? in which the publishers set a price for content and allow companies serving the content to take a cut of the sales ? will likely most benefit ebook giant Amazon, which prefers the "wholesale model." Under that model, publishers suggest a price and booksellers are free to set their own prices and offer their own discounts.

None of the parties involved in the investigation have been named guilty of any wrongdoing, and the Commission has assessed no fines. Interested parties will have one month to comment on Penguin's proposals before the Commission renders a decision.
post #2 of 37
Sorry, "publishers are free to set their own prices" is false. Amazon tells publishers what to charge.
post #3 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by tflanders View Post

Sorry, "publishers are free to set their own prices" is false. Amazon tells publishers what to charge.

Where does your quote come from??

 

It doesn't come from the AI article unless I'm missing it.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #4 of 37
So for us average types, does this "mean" that there was collusion, that some kind of fix was going on? Or that the book publishers all scurried off a sinking ship?
post #5 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elian Gonzalez View Post

So for us average types, does this "mean" that there was collusion, that some kind of fix was going on? Or that the book publishers all scurried off a sinking ship?

Jragosta will be along to answer that for you.1wink.gif

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #6 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Where does your quote come from??

 

It doesn't come from the AI article unless I'm missing it.

 

 

There have been plenty of stories over the years of Amazon squeezing publishers, which is why publishers were so eager to embrace Apple. Here is Amazon trying to force publishers to use its own Print on Demand services. This would be OK if its own services didn't cost more. Here is Amazon screwing over Developers on its free app of the day promotion. 

 

 

Moreover, Amazon was telling publishers it wouldn't allow them to sell hard cover books if it didn't steeply discount eBooks. Prior to Apple working out a deal with publishers, Amazon had over a 90 percent share of eBooks. Now it is more like 70 percent with Barnes and Noble and Apple taking some share. The deal helped competition. 

post #7 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by tflanders View Post

Sorry, "publishers are free to set their own prices" is false. Amazon tells publishers what to charge.

Publishers set their prices at wholesale - you, amazon, BN or any store owner pay that price and can sell it at your store at whatever you want after that point. Wholesale is how most products are bought for retail.


Edited by agramonte - 4/19/13 at 7:51am
post #8 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

 

 

There have been plenty of stories over the years of Amazon squeezing publishers, which is why publishers were so eager to embrace Apple. Here is Amazon trying to force publishers to use its own Print on Demand services. This would be OK if its own services didn't cost more. Here is Amazon screwing over Developers on its free app of the day promotion. 

 

 

Moreover, Amazon was telling publishers it wouldn't allow them to sell hard cover books if it didn't steeply discount eBooks. Prior to Apple working out a deal with publishers, Amazon had over a 90 percent share of eBooks. Now it is more like 70 percent with Barnes and Noble and Apple taking some share. The deal helped competition. 

I still don't see where Amazon was telling publishers what to charge, nor where the OP's quote came from. Maybe you have the link? As for Amazon in general they are certainly an aggressive competitor to retail outlets and may not have clean hands themselves. If they don't then the EU may come knocking on their door too one day.


Edited by Gatorguy - 4/19/13 at 7:48am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #9 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elian Gonzalez View Post

So for us average types, does this "mean" that there was collusion, that some kind of fix was going on? Or that the book publishers all scurried off a sinking ship?

 

 

They scurried off a sinking ship. Moreover, this law suit by the US and pressure from the EU go against traditional anti-competitive behaviour enforcement. First, Apple didn't collude with a competitor. Amazon is the competitor. Perhaps the publishers, as they are competitors, can be found to have colluded, but not Apple. Second, Apple has the same business model for apps and music, but nobody is complaining there. Third, the change to the agency model actually helped competition. Barnes and Noble and Apple were capturing some of Amazon's massive 90 percent share of the market. Barnes and Noble came out with the Nook, which in my view is better then the Kindle. Now with publishers abandoning their contracts with Apple, and Amazon going back to its ways, Barnes and Noble and Apple as well as other parties likely have little shot of competing with Amazon. Amazon is able to eat the cost on low cost e-books through money earned through its other operations.  This is the same type of thing Microsoft got in trouble for. Subsidizing Explorer through Windows sales at Netscape's expense. 

post #10 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I still don't see where Amazon was telling publishers what to charge, nor where the OP's quote came from. Maybe you have the link?

I misread, I agree I don't know where the quote came from. There are stories that suggest Amazon pressured publishers to lower prices on ebook by using hard cover book sales as leverage. 

post #11 of 37

It's very easy to obscure the truth with carefully chosen details and nitpicking. (Something that GG is a practiced hand at.) But, the simple truth is that Amazon already has a dangerous degree of control over the publishing industry, a situation that regulator actions in the EU and US will only succeed in making worse. Amazon's major competitors are all either KO'd or on the ropes, small booksellers may very soon become a thing of the past, and with Amazon awarded license to dictate terms to publishers, the entire industry, already in bad shape, is about to become a very unhealthy environment. For everyone but Amazon, that is.

 

Prices are the focus, but the pricing situation has been entirely misrepresented, and there were not "across the board" price increases as charged. Furthermore, while these regulator actions may result in cheaper prices on a few titles in the short run, the inevitable end result of these misguided actions will be higher prices and fewer voices, as Amazon gains increasing control of what gets published and where it's available.

 

It's a bad situation about to be made much worse, and only those -- like GG, apparently -- who don't believe in the fundamental values of a free society can applaud what's being done here, with the entire industry being handed to Amazon on a platter.

post #12 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by tflanders View Post

Sorry, "publishers are free to set their own prices" is false. Amazon tells publishers what to charge.
Where does your quote come from??

It doesn't come from the AI article unless I'm missing it.

I think the poster was referring to this bit:
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The ending of the "agency model" pricing ? in which the publishers set a price for content and allow companies serving the content ...
post #13 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

It's a bad situation about to be made much worse, and only those -- like GG, apparently -- who don't believe in the fundamental values of a free society can applaud what's being done here, with the entire industry being handed to Amazon on a platter.

 

That's a little disingenuous. Apple's deal with the publishers was in part an effort to control what other ebook vendors -- including Amazon, but also every other vendor -- could charge for their products. Is that consistent with "the fundamental values of a free society?" 

 

I agree that Amazon has a dangerous concentration of power, but I don't think Apple was purely a white knight in this affair. Both of them together are putting just about every other vendor of music, books, optical media, etc., out of business.

post #14 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post
Prices are the focus, but the pricing situation has been entirely misrepresented, and there were not "across the board" price increases as charged. Furthermore, while these regulator actions may result in cheaper prices on a few titles in the short run, the inevitable end result of these misguided actions will be higher prices and fewer voices, as Amazon gains increasing control of what gets published and where it's available.

 

It's a bad situation about to be made much worse, and only those -- like GG, apparently -- who don't believe in the fundamental values of a free society can applaud what's being done here, with the entire industry being handed to Amazon on a platter.

 

This already happened. Baen ebooks which were previously sold only via their own library have seen their price increase following landing a distribution contract with Amazon. They had no choice, Amazon was, as the distributor you cannot do without it, able to dictate its conditions, the main one being higher prices on new books.

 

The price increase is greater than 50% for books still only in hardcover and 16% for paperbacks.

 

Baen was able to continue distributing DRM-free but even that was touch and go it seems.

 

Everything is not bad as this also permit a bump in royalties for the authors but this show the power of Amazon.

 

http://www.teleread.com/ebooks/baen-inks-deal-with-amazon-makes-major-changes-to-webscriptions-and-free-library/

 

edited once to add reference link

post #15 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post


They scurried off a sinking ship. Moreover, this law suit by the US and pressure from the EU go against traditional anti-competitive behaviour enforcement. First, Apple didn't collude with a competitor. Amazon is the competitor. Perhaps the publishers, as they are competitors, can be found to have colluded, but not Apple. Second, Apple has the same business model for apps and music, but nobody is complaining there. Third, the change to the agency model actually helpedcompetition. Barnes and Noble and Apple were capturing some of Amazon's massive 90 percent share of the market. Barnes and Noble came out with the Nook, which in my view is better then the Kindle. Now with publishers abandoning their contracts with Apple, and Amazon going back to its ways, Barnes and Noble and Apple as well as other parties likely havelittle shot of competing with Amazon. Amazon is able to eat the cost on low cost e-books through money earned through its other operations.  This is the same type of thing Microsoft got in trouble for. Subsidizing Explorer through Windows sales at Netscape's expense. 

The agency model in itself is not the problem, and Apple is free to use it. The problem arises when that model is forced onto a competitor. The agency model is a double edge sword, on one side it's good for the publishers and Apple, and the other side it's bad. With the MFN clause the publishers will lose money when forced to match Amazon's price because of Apple's 30% cut yet with Amazon they'll always get the wholesale price regardless of what Amazon charges.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #16 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arlor View Post

 

That's a little disingenuous. Apple's deal with the publishers was in part an effort to control what other ebook vendors -- including Amazon, but also every other vendor -- could charge for their products. Is that consistent with "the fundamental values of a free society?" 

 

I agree that Amazon has a dangerous concentration of power, but I don't think Apple was purely a white knight in this affair. Both of them together are putting just about every other vendor of music, books, optical media, etc., out of business.

 

It's not disingenuous at all. The publishing industry is broken because of the inordinate power Amazon exercises over it. The agency model fixed that by removing central control of book pricing. Yes, Apple and every other bookseller, besides Amazon, benefitted from that fix, but more importantly, it was what was best for the industry and consumers in the long run. What their motives were is irrelevant, what's relevant is the effect it had. What's relevant with these regulator actions is the effect they will have. The effect the regulator actions will have is to solidify and increase Amazon's power to control the industry, including what gets published and where you can buy it. This interferes with, and will stifle, the free expression and dissemination of ideas, which is a necessary condition for a free society. The fundamental values of a free society are not the fundamental values of "free markets", and monopolies don't lead to free markets anyway. Your objections to my comments are noted, but are fundamentally confused.

post #17 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


The agency model in itself is not the problem, and Apple is free to use it. The problem arises when that model is forced onto a competitor. The agency model is a double edge sword, on one side it's good for the publishers and Apple, and the other side it's bad. With the MFN clause the publishers will lose money when forced to match Amazon's price because of Apple's 30% cut yet with Amazon they'll always get the wholesale price regardless of what Amazon charges.

 

Take your blinders off for once, step back, look at the big picture. The MFN clause is simply a counterweight to Amazon's ability to dictate terms because of their market position.

post #18 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Take your blinders off for once, step back, look at the big picture. The MFN clause is simply a counterweight to Amazon's ability to dictate terms because of their market position.

Then offer a better customer experience if you want to compete. Nobody gave Amazon their market position, there's nothing wrong with being first and most popular.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #19 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arlor View Post

 

That's a little disingenuous. Apple's deal with the publishers was in part an effort to control what other ebook vendors -- including Amazon, but also every other vendor -- could charge for their products. Is that consistent with "the fundamental values of a free society?" 

 

I agree that Amazon has a dangerous concentration of power, but I don't think Apple was purely a white knight in this affair. Both of them together are putting just about every other vendor of music, books, optical media, etc., out of business.

 

 

I think that focusing solely on the short term customer interest (lowest price) should be balanced by the need to have a healthy market = one into which noone sells at loss. Because if so, as mentioned by other posts , the mid/long term (and desired) effect is to kill some players, which ultimately goes against competition, and therefore customer interest, if only one (Amazon) is left. Having said this, it is clear to me that publishers tend to fix ebook prices higher than they could be, because they are in fact reluctant to enter a future where the traditional paper book is no longer competitive. Publishers (for books or Neswpapers) have to reinvent their business, this is not just a pricing policy issue.

 

Indeed Apple will benefit from this new digital age, at the detriment of traditional players, but Apple's vision of dematerialized content is a long term objective, pursued with tenacity, and it is fair that they enjoy success, as they have done all necessary efforts to make it possible ... which is not exactly the case of other traditional players, who only think in terms of protecting their established position (including, and I am surprised the debate never goes into this, the royalties paid to authors, which can no longer be as low as they are, in the new digital age, as the publisher takes much less risks, and invests much less).

post #20 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Apple BAD! Others GOOD! I don't see. Have the link? Thank you for showing me the error of my ways. See you in my next pointless post!

Perhaps you should just add this to your signature to save time from now on?
post #21 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post


Perhaps you should just add this to your signature to save time from now on?

LOL!

 

EDIT: The next time  The first time I post that Apple is bad and others good I'll be sure to use it. Thanks!

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #22 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


Then offer a better customer experience if you want to compete. Nobody gave Amazon their market position, there's nothing wrong with being first and most popular.

 

That still doesn't mean it's good for consumers in the long run, or that it results in a healthy publishing industry, which ought to be the priority in a free society.

 

You've still got your blinders on.

post #23 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

LOL!

 

EDIT: The next time  The first time I post that Apple is bad and others good I'll be sure to use it. Thanks!

 

Did you mean the first time today, Fornecedor de Mentiras?

post #24 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

That still doesn't mean it's good for consumers in the long run, or that it results in a healthy publishing industry, which ought to be the priority in a free society.

You've still got your blinders on.

I'm sure you'd have your blinders on if Apple and Amazon switched places. Funny how all of a sudden Apple wants to let the publishers set the price. Did they give the music industry that option or was it "sell it at our price or we won't carry it", so it's okay for Apple to dictate terms but God forbid someone beats Apple to it? Here's our 11 year plan for you start making money.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #25 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


I'm sure you'd have your blinders on if Apple and Amazon switched places. Funny how all of a sudden Apple wants to let the publishers set the price. Did they give the music industry that option or was it "sell it at our price or we won't carry it", so it's okay for Apple to dictate terms but God forbid someone beats Apple to it?

 

I'd certainly have the blinders on!

 

The difference is, when Apple gets into a position of power, they tend to use that power to effect change. Industry wide change.

 

Most other companies that find themselves in positions of power just try extract money from wallets.

 

I'm surprised that many people on this forum are regularly unable to discern this.

post #26 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


I'm sure you'd have your blinders on if Apple and Amazon switched places. Funny how all of a sudden Apple wants to let the publishers set the price. Did they give the music industry that option or was it "sell it at our price or we won't carry it", so it's okay for Apple to dictate terms but God forbid someone beats Apple to it? Here's our 11 year plan for you start making money.

 

Since all you seem capable of understanding is "price", I'll point out to you that when Apple started the iTunes music store with a plan to sell everything for the same price, the record companies had a serious problem with piracy that threatened the industry. The result was that music piracy is inconsequential now and the record companies are actually able to sell music rather than just watch it be downloaded for free. Again, the result, while good for Apple, was also good for the industry. Different situations, different approaches, but in both cases, good for everyone, including consumers.

 

There is no possible argument to be made that what Amazon is doing to publishing is good for the industry.

post #27 of 37
Quote:
I'd certainly have the blinders on!

The difference is, when Apple gets into a position of power, they tend to use that power to effect change. Industry wide change.

Most other companies that find themselves in positions of power just try extract money from wallets.

I'm surprised that many people on this forum are regularly unable to discern this.

Except that they didn't have the power this time. They were late to the game and in a rare instance could not offer a better user experience.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #28 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Since all you seem capable of understanding is "price", I'll point out to you that when Apple started the iTunes music store with a plan to sell everything for the same price, the record companies had a serious problem with piracy that threatened the industry. The result was that music piracy is inconsequential now and the record companies are actually able to sell music rather than just watch it be downloaded for free. Again, the result, while good for Apple, was also good for the industry. Different situations, different approaches, but in both cases, good for everyone, including consumers.

There is no possible argument to be made that what Amazon is doing to publishing is good for the industry.

And what exactly is Amazon doing? And before you answer do some research. Check prices and see if for the most part they're the same across all ebook stores.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #29 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


And what exactly is Amazon doing? 

 

Destroying the publishing industry so they can pick up the pieces and control it end to end, from writer to reader.

post #30 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Destroying the publishing industry so they can pick up the pieces and control it end to end, from writer to reader.

What proof do you have?
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #31 of 37
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post
What proof do you have?

 

Come on.

 

Now, I wouldn't say "destroying", but what he said is what they want to do.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #32 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Come on.

Now, I wouldn't say "destroying", but what he said is what they want to do.

Citation needed
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #33 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elian Gonzalez View Post

So for us average types, does this "mean" that there was collusion, that some kind of fix was going on? Or that the book publishers all scurried off a sinking ship?

 

 

They scurried off a sinking ship. Moreover, this law suit by the US and pressure from the EU go against traditional anti-competitive behaviour enforcement. First, Apple didn't collude with a competitor. Amazon is the competitor. Perhaps the publishers, as they are competitors, can be found to have colluded, but not Apple. Second, Apple has the same business model for apps and music, but nobody is complaining there. Third, the change to the agency model actually helped competition. Barnes and Noble and Apple were capturing some of Amazon's massive 90 percent share of the market. Barnes and Noble came out with the Nook, which in my view is better then the Kindle. Now with publishers abandoning their contracts with Apple, and Amazon going back to its ways, Barnes and Noble and Apple as well as other parties likely have little shot of competing with Amazon. Amazon is able to eat the cost on low cost e-books through money earned through its other operations.  This is the same type of thing Microsoft got in trouble for. Subsidizing Explorer through Windows sales at Netscape's expense. 

 

Apple absolutely colluded and that is why everyone except for Apple has settled out both in the U.S. and in Europe. Think about how much your view is diametrically opposed to the facts and how parties on two different continents have to act in the exact same damaging function, all to hurt Apple and help Amazon. That just isn't happening.

 

Barnes and Noble and just about anyone else still have plenty of ability to compete. The reality is that Amazon has been an innovator and first to market with almost all advances.

 

You might be correct that Amazon is helping to "kill" the publishing industry, but only killing it as the expensive middleman between authors and their audience with the money. In that regard Amazon might be able to do what Apple never could, end the sharecropper type agreements between the people producing the content and those getting it to the people purchasing their content.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

It's very easy to obscure the truth with carefully chosen details and nitpicking. (Something that GG is a practiced hand at.) But, the simple truth is that Amazon already has a dangerous degree of control over the publishing industry, a situation that regulator actions in the EU and US will only succeed in making worse. Amazon's major competitors are all either KO'd or on the ropes, small booksellers may very soon become a thing of the past, and with Amazon awarded license to dictate terms to publishers, the entire industry, already in bad shape, is about to become a very unhealthy environment. For everyone but Amazon, that is.

 

Prices are the focus, but the pricing situation has been entirely misrepresented, and there were not "across the board" price increases as charged. Furthermore, while these regulator actions may result in cheaper prices on a few titles in the short run, the inevitable end result of these misguided actions will be higher prices and fewer voices, as Amazon gains increasing control of what gets published and where it's available.

 

It's a bad situation about to be made much worse, and only those -- like GG, apparently -- who don't believe in the fundamental values of a free society can applaud what's being done here, with the entire industry being handed to Amazon on a platter.

 

Regulators on two continents and the facts they were presented disagree with you. Apple helped negotiate the new price points so they could keep their 30% and that is the truth. Your "inevitable end result" is repeated like a mantra by you and it is baseless. You are treating people badly and declaring them to be liars based off a vision in your head.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by lukefrench View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post
Prices are the focus, but the pricing situation has been entirely misrepresented, and there were not "across the board" price increases as charged. Furthermore, while these regulator actions may result in cheaper prices on a few titles in the short run, the inevitable end result of these misguided actions will be higher prices and fewer voices, as Amazon gains increasing control of what gets published and where it's available.

 

It's a bad situation about to be made much worse, and only those -- like GG, apparently -- who don't believe in the fundamental values of a free society can applaud what's being done here, with the entire industry being handed to Amazon on a platter.

 

This already happened. Baen ebooks which were previously sold only via their own library have seen their price increase following landing a distribution contract with Amazon. They had no choice, Amazon was, as the distributor you cannot do without it, able to dictate its conditions, the main one being higher prices on new books.

 

The price increase is greater than 50% for books still only in hardcover and 16% for paperbacks.

 

Baen was able to continue distributing DRM-free but even that was touch and go it seems.

 

Everything is not bad as this also permit a bump in royalties for the authors but this show the power of Amazon.

 

http://www.teleread.com/ebooks/baen-inks-deal-with-amazon-makes-major-changes-to-webscriptions-and-free-library/

 

edited once to add reference link

 

Your own link does not support your conclusion. Also Amazon could be done without. Baen offered their books and continue to offer their books DRM free and with unique bundling and promotional deals. Those deals are still even intact and allowed at their own website. However you seem upset that Baen cannot dictate how Amazon does business when Amazon has not done the reverse. Amazon has merely stated how they will sell the publisher content. The publisher is still selling same content however they want on their own website while giving the authors a higher royalty rate. How is that bad for business?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arlor View Post

 

That's a little disingenuous. Apple's deal with the publishers was in part an effort to control what other ebook vendors -- including Amazon, but also every other vendor -- could charge for their products. Is that consistent with "the fundamental values of a free society?" 

 

I agree that Amazon has a dangerous concentration of power, but I don't think Apple was purely a white knight in this affair. Both of them together are putting just about every other vendor of music, books, optical media, etc., out of business.

 

It's not disingenuous at all. The publishing industry is broken because of the inordinate power Amazon exercises over it. The agency model fixed that by removing central control of book pricing. Yes, Apple and every other bookseller, besides Amazon, benefitted from that fix, but more importantly, it was what was best for the industry and consumers in the long run. What their motives were is irrelevant, what's relevant is the effect it had. What's relevant with these regulator actions is the effect they will have. The effect the regulator actions will have is to solidify and increase Amazon's power to control the industry, including what gets published and where you can buy it. This interferes with, and will stifle, the free expression and dissemination of ideas, which is a necessary condition for a free society. The fundamental values of a free society are not the fundamental values of "free markets", and monopolies don't lead to free markets anyway. Your objections to my comments are noted, but are fundamentally confused.

 

Wrong in every conceivable manner that something can be wrong. All of these old media corporations made their money by being very expensive gatekeepers. The artists and authors that had to sign under them were akin to sharecroppers who owed the majority of their work, revenue and often even their rights to said work to the media corporation.

 

New media, and Apple is that with regard to digital music, wanted a simple cut in exchange for hosting and distribution. The deals are straight forward. The problem for Apple is that they demand 30% and once upon a time that was probably a fair number for how expensive it was to host everything. However a decade plus later, in the age of 3 terabyte drives for $120, the costs of hosting this content are miniscule and Amazon is taking advantage of that fact. They are simply willing to accept less than 30% while also innovating in the area of epublishing. Apple hasn't innovated and won't accept less so they tried to cut a deal.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


I'm sure you'd have your blinders on if Apple and Amazon switched places. Funny how all of a sudden Apple wants to let the publishers set the price. Did they give the music industry that option or was it "sell it at our price or we won't carry it", so it's okay for Apple to dictate terms but God forbid someone beats Apple to it? Here's our 11 year plan for you start making money.

 

Since all you seem capable of understanding is "price", I'll point out to you that when Apple started the iTunes music store with a plan to sell everything for the same price, the record companies had a serious problem with piracy that threatened the industry. The result was that music piracy is inconsequential now and the record companies are actually able to sell music rather than just watch it be downloaded for free. Again, the result, while good for Apple, was also good for the industry. Different situations, different approaches, but in both cases, good for everyone, including consumers.

 

There is no possible argument to be made that what Amazon is doing to publishing is good for the industry.

 

There is no argument you will accept to supersede the visions in your head. Most digital books from self-publishing authors, and these are great books, are going for much less than $9.99 which is already down from the price of the hardcover book. Apple was allowing publishers to prop up the old model.

 

This is an example of a broken model being propped up. It is an example of the new model.

 

Just to be clear, this is going to continue to happen. It's pretty clear YouTube is going to be the Amazon of video. My kids don't even watch TV or know what a television network is anymore. They subscribe to shows and the people who do their favorite shows are paid in micro-transactions. It isn't hard at all to imagine them being willing to pay $.99 for a year of Shawn Dawson or whoever else they watch. I'm sure old media will push back then too and if Apple lands on the right side I'll support them but if they don't, then screw them. Screw anyone who tries to hold back the future.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Quote:
I'd certainly have the blinders on!

The difference is, when Apple gets into a position of power, they tend to use that power to effect change. Industry wide change.

Most other companies that find themselves in positions of power just try extract money from wallets.

I'm surprised that many people on this forum are regularly unable to discern this.

Except that they didn't have the power this time. They were late to the game and in a rare instance could not offer a better user experience.

 

Exactly and the real point is that there is still plenty of room to price innovate and create better hardware in this market. Apple could do it but they simply don't. Amazon is the one who is innovating with Kindle Singles as an example. They are a great example of writing that is much like a single song. This Stephen King essay on guns is an especially good example of what Amazon is doing that I like.

 

Do you like Stephen King but don't know if you want to hear what he has to say about guns? Well it is the cost of a soda to find out and King even donated his portion to a cause he believes in. This wasn't possible until recently and the amount of great stuff out the for a few dollars is growing exponentially.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


And what exactly is Amazon doing? 

 

Destroying the publishing industry so they can pick up the pieces and control it end to end, from writer to reader.

 

This sounds like a great book. Maybe you should write it and self-publish it on Amazon for $0.99 just to be ironic.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Destroying the publishing industry so they can pick up the pieces and control it end to end, from writer to reader.

What proof do you have?

 

The voices in his head assure him that he is right.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #34 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


Citation needed

 

lol.gif 

 

Citation needed, the refuge of the weak minded.

post #35 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Regulators on two continents and the facts they were presented disagree with you. Apple helped negotiate the new price points so they could keep their 30% and that is the truth. Your "inevitable end result" is repeated like a mantra by you and it is baseless. You are treating people badly and declaring them to be liars based off a vision in your head.

 

Your snark may go to 11, but your reading comprehension apparently only goes to 1. We'll just ignore your little fantasy of, "... declaring people to be liars..." and put that down to the fact that you don't know what you read.

 

Establishing truth isn't a democratic process, so your point about, "Regulators on two continents" is beside the point. Well, almost, because, in case you missed it because you haven't understood the posts in this thread, the discussion is about whether these regulators have a clue what they are doing (so, citing them as authorities to support their assertions doesn't really fly), or whether they are clueless bureaucrats taking us down the road to ruin.

 

Unfortunately for your "argument", the facts, including recent history of the publishing industry, don't support the notion of Amazon as a benevolent force working for the good of society.

post #36 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Regulators on two continents and the facts they were presented disagree with you. Apple helped negotiate the new price points so they could keep their 30% and that is the truth. Your "inevitable end result" is repeated like a mantra by you and it is baseless. You are treating people badly and declaring them to be liars based off a vision in your head.

 

Your snark may go to 11, but your reading comprehension apparently only goes to 1. We'll just ignore your little fantasy of, "... declaring people to be liars..." and put that down to the fact that you don't know what you read.

 

I know that when I read this.......

 

It's very easy to obscure the truth with carefully chosen details and nitpicking. (Something that GG is a practiced hand at.)

 

....that you are calling him a liar. So thanks, I do know what I read just fine.

Quote:
Establishing truth isn't a democratic process, so your point about, "Regulators on two continents" is beside the point.

Establishing truth also isn't ignoring that you've been asked for your proof and that all you've done is treat people badly and repeat yourself.

 

Quote:

Well, almost, because, in case you missed it because you haven't understood the posts in this thread, the discussion is about whether these regulators have a clue what they are doing (so, citing them as authorities to support their assertions doesn't really fly), or whether they are clueless bureaucrats taking us down the road to ruin.

Well per you, all these publishers just signed their own death certificates and did so willingly rather than just risking a trial. The facts don't even attempt to match your narrative.

 

Penguin is owned by Peason. Here is Peason's five year chart. The stock is profitable, on a gradual rise and it pays a 5% dividend. Cite some proof that at least pretends to support your narrative.

Quote:

Unfortunately for your "argument", the facts, including recent history of the publishing industry, don't support the notion of Amazon as a benevolent force working for the good of society.

You've been asked for these "facts" that you swear by several times already in this thread. Since you haven't produced them, they are imaginary. We aren't seeing any sort of issues related to the transition from physical books to ebooks are that are different from any other transition. Some companies that relied on the old model are being hurt, but that doesn't mean Amazon is stopping them from transitioning or that they aren't allowed to do so due to Amazon's terms.

 

Cite some proof beyond "narrative in my head screams disaster due to Amazon!!!"

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #37 of 37
I rarely disagree with the EU, but to my stupid eye, this is helping Amazon, an already huge monster without shame...

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Penguin hopes to appease EU regulators by ending e-book deal with Apple