Stop working yourself up into a lather by having a conversation with yourself (glad to see that you're finally posting beyond your obligatory three words).
And, get real. You're not the only one that 'multitasks.'
And, while you're at it: (i) Grow up; (ii) Get a life.
Between the costs of producing a book (publisher) and the costs of selling it (amazon) there is negotiating room, and for a mammoth market presence like Amazon, they enjoy Wal-Mart-esque "monopsony" power, which is the buyer's equivalent of a monopoly (which technically refers to one seller). Therefore, the prices in these negotiations probably favored Amazon, because who would ever dare NOT sell to amazon? (see what happened to Rubbermaid when they told Wal-Mart to screw themselves... their sales disappeared overnight).
Apple gives publishers another mainstream outlet, and therefore negotiating power at the table with Amazon. Clearly it was MacMillan that smugly started this skirmish, and they probably had a right to be pissed after getting strongarmed all this time. Besides, with a name like Amazon (and a logo that suggests "A to Z") you are in the diversity business and it damages your brand too much to leave a major player out like this and have customers shopping elsewhere for it.
So even if Jobs "screws the customer" on this one by getting publishers more money, it is ultimately a win for competition, since Amazon's advantage was probably anti-competitive (monopolistic) to some extent.
The longer term question is just like with the music labels: why do we need publishing houses? If they are just vertical integrators of discovering / bankrolling / editing / marketing / inventorying books, why can't the next great american novel just be brought to apple directly? Or amazon for that matter? Or published from one's own website?
Sure, someone has to give Sarah Palin her bazillion dollar advance for her book, and find someone literate to actually ghostwrite it -- just like Britney Spears needs a lot of help in producing an album -- but ultimately the days of the little guy placing his beloved manuscript in a worn, soft leather briefcase. hailing a cab uptown, and taking it into a skyscraper to bring it to the masses are hopefully on the decline.
And we'll be better for it; tell me: does a physics 101 textbook really need to cost $100 and be rewritten every few years, or is that done just to juice the demand? Publishing houses aren't exactly playing clean, either. You get the idea.
RUBBER MAID SELLS TO WALMART UNDER A NEW BRANDED NAME OF WHICH WALMART INVEST 399 MILLIUON DOLLARS
RUBBER MAID WON THAT BATTLE
APPLE IS THE LARGEST MUSIC STORE IN THE WORLD
hundreds of thousands of long lost writers artist bands groups and the such now get checks from apple
songs long dead from 1964 are now sell 200 a week
every week
apple will do the same for books
apple will even send you a hard copy at some point
Comments
Stop working yourself up into a lather by having a conversation with yourself (glad to see that you're finally posting beyond your obligatory three words).
And, get real. You're not the only one that 'multitasks.'
And, while you're at it: (i) Grow up; (ii) Get a life.
agreed
teckboy wore out his welcome
sad life
Between the costs of producing a book (publisher) and the costs of selling it (amazon) there is negotiating room, and for a mammoth market presence like Amazon, they enjoy Wal-Mart-esque "monopsony" power, which is the buyer's equivalent of a monopoly (which technically refers to one seller). Therefore, the prices in these negotiations probably favored Amazon, because who would ever dare NOT sell to amazon? (see what happened to Rubbermaid when they told Wal-Mart to screw themselves... their sales disappeared overnight).
Apple gives publishers another mainstream outlet, and therefore negotiating power at the table with Amazon. Clearly it was MacMillan that smugly started this skirmish, and they probably had a right to be pissed after getting strongarmed all this time. Besides, with a name like Amazon (and a logo that suggests "A to Z") you are in the diversity business and it damages your brand too much to leave a major player out like this and have customers shopping elsewhere for it.
So even if Jobs "screws the customer" on this one by getting publishers more money, it is ultimately a win for competition, since Amazon's advantage was probably anti-competitive (monopolistic) to some extent.
The longer term question is just like with the music labels: why do we need publishing houses? If they are just vertical integrators of discovering / bankrolling / editing / marketing / inventorying books, why can't the next great american novel just be brought to apple directly? Or amazon for that matter? Or published from one's own website?
Sure, someone has to give Sarah Palin her bazillion dollar advance for her book, and find someone literate to actually ghostwrite it -- just like Britney Spears needs a lot of help in producing an album -- but ultimately the days of the little guy placing his beloved manuscript in a worn, soft leather briefcase. hailing a cab uptown, and taking it into a skyscraper to bring it to the masses are hopefully on the decline.
And we'll be better for it; tell me: does a physics 101 textbook really need to cost $100 and be rewritten every few years, or is that done just to juice the demand? Publishing houses aren't exactly playing clean, either. You get the idea.
RUBBER MAID SELLS TO WALMART UNDER A NEW BRANDED NAME OF WHICH WALMART INVEST 399 MILLIUON DOLLARS
RUBBER MAID WON THAT BATTLE
APPLE IS THE LARGEST MUSIC STORE IN THE WORLD
hundreds of thousands of long lost writers artist bands groups and the such now get checks from apple
songs long dead from 1964 are now sell 200 a week
every week
apple will do the same for books
apple will even send you a hard copy at some point
apple world domination cont.