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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
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.
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arlor
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
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.
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
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
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.
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.
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!!!"
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.
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.
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.
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!!!"
Oh, well, GG, I don't even count the comments directed at him as part of the discussion, yes, he's a professional liar, gets paid to post here, what of it? Although, in that instance, I was referring to deception via facts, which is not exactly the same thing as lying, although the intent is the same, but, technically, you are incorrect that you know what you read.
As for historical facts, have you stopped at Borders or Books-A-Million lately? I guess you've been too busy being snarky to buy or read any books, and maybe you haven't read the news either. That might explain why you think the current state of the publishing industry represents a healthy industry.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
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?
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
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.
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.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
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.
What proof do you have?
Originally Posted by dasanman69
What proof do you have?
Come on.
Now, I wouldn't say "destroying", but what he said is what they want to do.
Citation needed
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elian Gonzalez
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
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arlor
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
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
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Citation needed
Citation needed, the refuge of the weak minded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman
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!!!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman
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.
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.
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.
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!!!"
Oh, well, GG, I don't even count the comments directed at him as part of the discussion, yes, he's a professional liar, gets paid to post here, what of it? Although, in that instance, I was referring to deception via facts, which is not exactly the same thing as lying, although the intent is the same, but, technically, you are incorrect that you know what you read.
As for historical facts, have you stopped at Borders or Books-A-Million lately? I guess you've been too busy being snarky to buy or read any books, and maybe you haven't read the news either. That might explain why you think the current state of the publishing industry represents a healthy industry.
BTW, here is Google's five year chart. As you can see, Motorola is doing great.