Exactly, so unless they're able to differentiate themselves from the iBookstore and Amazon most will probably not last long. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that they exist and will at least check them out.
I don't buy ebooks. But if I did, I would have a choice and not rely on only Amazon.
But I'd guess that even though you had a choice you wouldn't even bother buying from anyone else than from Apple. It's kinda like all those useless features on a Samsung phone, people don't use them but like knowing that they're there.
The funny thing is that they blame Apple because they are preventing Amazon to sell books at, or bellow cost, arguing it raised the prices for the customers.
Selling at or below cost is prohibited in many countries because it is anticompetitive for a large company to kill emerging competition by selling at or below cost.
An cross subsidies are, they give away the SW to promote the Kindle, and to kill competition, they got Borders, one more to go...
1. You're wrong. Most people I know always have "a good book they're enjoying" on hand. I read about 4 books a month on average (3 of those are now digital, typically). The sales levels of books in general (print or digital) remains extremely strong. J.K. Rowling didn't become a billionaire because "no one reads books anymore".
2. I "value" my ebooks almost as much as my print editions. I will agree that there is something more inherently "tangible" with the tactile paper book. It is possible to "bond" with a physical book in a way I can't 'sense' with a digital version. But the truth is, most of the books I read will only be read once. I've given away most of what I've read (something I can't do with my digital versions sadly), and those books that I want to keep, I typically buy the print edition of, and add to my library. I keep that to a minimum now though, as I discovered that lugging a library around was more a burden than a blessing. For this, I'm ever grateful to my growing digital library. I'm learning to love it almost as much as the musty books on my shelves.
3. I disagree. I think the reasons for "reduced sales" are unrelated to your 1 & 2 premises. In fact, "reduced sales" in the general book world will have little or nothing to do with these matters at all. The modern 'consumer' has become desensitized to "suggested retail prices", and reacts almost instinctively to "promotional" activities and the quality of the offerings. The baseline pricing of books has little overall effect on the market's sales pace.
It's more like the movie industry. When a Summer full of great films arrives, it's a blockbuster season. When most of the films are copycat tripe riding the coattails of one major hit, it's a crap season (I'm speaking in terms of revenues here). Pricing does aid competition, and good value inspires more sales, but in the end, as always, it's the "content" that matters most.
Harry Potter outsold everything else in history for top-priced hard cover editions. Dan Brown books as well. When they're popular, they sell. Yes. $30 for a hard cover book, versus $15 for the 'deluxe' paperback, versus $10 for the ebook… And yet, most people bought the Hard Cover. By the tens of millions.
Because, you know, nobody reads books anymore.
Harry Potter was almost 20 years ago.
Where is the "Harry Potter" of the last 5 years?
Today's most successful books seem to be soft core porn for housewives.
It's different because I included the MFN clause not the agency model. Apple doesn't forbid them the agreement does.
It's not so much "forbidding" as allowing Apple to sell at lower prices. Apple allowed the publishers to set retail prices. Apple put caps on what they could charge. The publisher might well say some titles should retail for 14.99 (taking into account Apple's 30%), in which case the publisher receives 10.50 and Apple gets 4.49.
So, let's say Amazon bought the same title from the publisher at wholesale for 10.50, but Amazon sold it at a loss for 9.99. Apple is asking that if the same title is sold elsewhere for less than the 14.99, that Apple can lower it to that price as well, in order to be competitive. Apple says they want to be able to sell it for 9.99 as well -- in which case the publisher would get 6 and Apple would get 3.
But, I can see how this would encourage the Publishers to seek Agency models with Amazon, rather than the wholesale model.
Today's most successful books seem to be soft core porn for housewives.
They're out there but need to be found. The Game of Thrones books are just as old and it's only recently that George RR Martin is enjoying the fruits of his labor.
They're out there but need to be found. The Game of Thrones books are just as old and it's only recently that George RR Martin is enjoying the fruits of his labor.
The GoT is actually older than HP and the Philosopher's Stone by one year. I'm am indeed old now. It's nice that the book series is getting a secondary boost because of the TV series, and GRRM is getting much deserved mainstream attention, but he went all Robert Jordan on us with the last two books. He really only had enough for 3 books. After that, it's been a slog through the mud.
Anyways, yeah, I wouldn't say that there aren't any great novels or books anymore, nor no more international best sellers. They are out there, and will continue to be out there, but I think some of you have to think more carefully about with a "digital good" is and how it plays out in the market. It's great that there some people who really value books, the stories in of themselves, and are willing to pay $10 to $20 for an ebook at release time. But I simply do not see the market economics supporting the prices seen in paper based books, especially hard covers. Not even at mass paper back prices of $6 to $8? Btw, is a mass paperback even $8 anymore? Has the SRP reached $9 yet?
A digital good essentially has infinite supply. I'll say it again, a digital good has infinite supply. The consumer of digital goods has market powers heretofore unknown in the physical goods, as they can get a pirated copy of it with not much effort. Then, the aforementioned intense competition for our free time. Crowded market, low demand, and infinite supply all spell low prices, and not $10. It'll really be a minimum risk, disposable amount of money. The money for a digital good acts more as a service than as way to own it.
The price will be less than $5, probably closer to $2 then $5. It doesn't matter if the price control was in the hands of publishers or retailers either. In a digital world, they are effectively the same thing anyways (with an agency model, Amazon selling Kindle books on iOS is a defacto publisher, not a retailer). Only the renown, branded authors will be able to command a price premium, maybe.
On the bright side, if the cost is so low, it will mean more books will be in the eyes of readers, but there will be less overall money for the industry. Who knows maybe increased volume really will make it up as the digital world encompasses the entire world instead of a physical distribution network. The industry (authors, publishers, resellers) have to do things differently in a digital world.
No. That article does NOT "explain how this [MFN] policy equates with colluding to raise prices."
It does point out how overall prices at the consumer end rose by 18% or so. Correct. But when you back up and look twice, you'll see that it's relative to Amazon's loss leader pricing, and not due to a baseline increase in wholesale pricing.
So instead, it can be fairly stated that the Agency model introduced by Apple restored fair pricing AND competition to the ebook market.
I'm curious. Why is this so completely lost on you?
I'm equally curious about something else… Do you mind if I ask, do you work with or for Amazon in any way that directly benefits you? In particular, with regards to the ebook marketplace?
No I do not work for Amazon. The only side I'm on is yours and mine as consumers.
Today's most successful books seem to be soft core porn for housewives.
That's not true, the first HP book was 16 years ago and the most recent was 6.
Harry Potter is the most successful book series of all time. Saying that books are dead because there isn't a current "Harry Potter" is like saying pop music is dead because there's no current Beatlemania, absurd.
Maybe the latest success story is soft porn for housewives. That's still a book. Your distaste for it doesn't negate the fact that it's a book and people are reading it.
Comments
Let me ask you a simple question. If the same exact ebook is in one of these new stores and in the iBookstore, who will you buy from?
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Let me ask you a simple question. If the same exact ebook is in one of these new stores and in the iBookstore, who will you buy from?
iBooks Store.
Exactly, so unless they're able to differentiate themselves from the iBookstore and Amazon most will probably not last long. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that they exist and will at least check them out.
I don't buy ebooks. But if I did, I would have a choice and not rely on only Amazon.
But I'd guess that even though you had a choice you wouldn't even bother buying from anyone else than from Apple. It's kinda like all those useless features on a Samsung phone, people don't use them but like knowing that they're there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scapal
The funny thing is that they blame Apple because they are preventing Amazon to sell books at, or bellow cost, arguing it raised the prices for the customers.
Selling at or below cost is prohibited in many countries because it is anticompetitive for a large company to kill emerging competition by selling at or below cost.
An cross subsidies are, they give away the SW to promote the Kindle, and to kill competition, they got Borders, one more to go...
Would you prefer that Apple not allow the Kindle app?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical
1. You're wrong. Most people I know always have "a good book they're enjoying" on hand. I read about 4 books a month on average (3 of those are now digital, typically). The sales levels of books in general (print or digital) remains extremely strong. J.K. Rowling didn't become a billionaire because "no one reads books anymore".
2. I "value" my ebooks almost as much as my print editions. I will agree that there is something more inherently "tangible" with the tactile paper book. It is possible to "bond" with a physical book in a way I can't 'sense' with a digital version. But the truth is, most of the books I read will only be read once. I've given away most of what I've read (something I can't do with my digital versions sadly), and those books that I want to keep, I typically buy the print edition of, and add to my library. I keep that to a minimum now though, as I discovered that lugging a library around was more a burden than a blessing. For this, I'm ever grateful to my growing digital library. I'm learning to love it almost as much as the musty books on my shelves.
3. I disagree. I think the reasons for "reduced sales" are unrelated to your 1 & 2 premises. In fact, "reduced sales" in the general book world will have little or nothing to do with these matters at all. The modern 'consumer' has become desensitized to "suggested retail prices", and reacts almost instinctively to "promotional" activities and the quality of the offerings. The baseline pricing of books has little overall effect on the market's sales pace.
It's more like the movie industry. When a Summer full of great films arrives, it's a blockbuster season. When most of the films are copycat tripe riding the coattails of one major hit, it's a crap season (I'm speaking in terms of revenues here). Pricing does aid competition, and good value inspires more sales, but in the end, as always, it's the "content" that matters most.
Harry Potter outsold everything else in history for top-priced hard cover editions. Dan Brown books as well. When they're popular, they sell. Yes. $30 for a hard cover book, versus $15 for the 'deluxe' paperback, versus $10 for the ebook… And yet, most people bought the Hard Cover. By the tens of millions.
Because, you know, nobody reads books anymore.
Harry Potter was almost 20 years ago.
Where is the "Harry Potter" of the last 5 years?
Today's most successful books seem to be soft core porn for housewives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
It's different because I included the MFN clause not the agency model. Apple doesn't forbid them the agreement does.
It's not so much "forbidding" as allowing Apple to sell at lower prices. Apple allowed the publishers to set retail prices. Apple put caps on what they could charge. The publisher might well say some titles should retail for 14.99 (taking into account Apple's 30%), in which case the publisher receives 10.50 and Apple gets 4.49.
So, let's say Amazon bought the same title from the publisher at wholesale for 10.50, but Amazon sold it at a loss for 9.99. Apple is asking that if the same title is sold elsewhere for less than the 14.99, that Apple can lower it to that price as well, in order to be competitive. Apple says they want to be able to sell it for 9.99 as well -- in which case the publisher would get 6 and Apple would get 3.
But, I can see how this would encourage the Publishers to seek Agency models with Amazon, rather than the wholesale model.
They're out there but need to be found. The Game of Thrones books are just as old and it's only recently that George RR Martin is enjoying the fruits of his labor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
They're out there but need to be found. The Game of Thrones books are just as old and it's only recently that George RR Martin is enjoying the fruits of his labor.
The GoT is actually older than HP and the Philosopher's Stone by one year.
Anyways, yeah, I wouldn't say that there aren't any great novels or books anymore, nor no more international best sellers. They are out there, and will continue to be out there, but I think some of you have to think more carefully about with a "digital good" is and how it plays out in the market. It's great that there some people who really value books, the stories in of themselves, and are willing to pay $10 to $20 for an ebook at release time. But I simply do not see the market economics supporting the prices seen in paper based books, especially hard covers. Not even at mass paper back prices of $6 to $8? Btw, is a mass paperback even $8 anymore? Has the SRP reached $9 yet?
A digital good essentially has infinite supply. I'll say it again, a digital good has infinite supply. The consumer of digital goods has market powers heretofore unknown in the physical goods, as they can get a pirated copy of it with not much effort. Then, the aforementioned intense competition for our free time. Crowded market, low demand, and infinite supply all spell low prices, and not $10. It'll really be a minimum risk, disposable amount of money. The money for a digital good acts more as a service than as way to own it.
The price will be less than $5, probably closer to $2 then $5. It doesn't matter if the price control was in the hands of publishers or retailers either. In a digital world, they are effectively the same thing anyways (with an agency model, Amazon selling Kindle books on iOS is a defacto publisher, not a retailer). Only the renown, branded authors will be able to command a price premium, maybe.
On the bright side, if the cost is so low, it will mean more books will be in the eyes of readers, but there will be less overall money for the industry. Who knows maybe increased volume really will make it up as the digital world encompasses the entire world instead of a physical distribution network. The industry (authors, publishers, resellers) have to do things differently in a digital world.
buy Cheap Apple Imac
Ipad mini
Apple ipad 2
Apple Ipad 3rd
Apple iphone 4s
Apple iphone 5 just $300usd
Apple ipod touch 4th Generation
Apple macbook
Dell Alienware
Nokia Mobile Phone
Samsung galaxy s4 on sale
YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!!
No I do not work for Amazon. The only side I'm on is yours and mine as consumers.
So how will destroying all the competitors who now share 40% of the eBook market since Apple came on the scene help consumers?
The DoJ just handed Amazon the opportunity to reclaim 90% of the market, meaning eBooks will not be viable for any but the largest providers.
It won't help us at all. I think what the DoJ is doing is very bad for competition and for us as consumers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Harry Potter was almost 20 years ago.
Where is the "Harry Potter" of the last 5 years?
Today's most successful books seem to be soft core porn for housewives.
That's not true, the first HP book was 16 years ago and the most recent was 6.
Harry Potter is the most successful book series of all time. Saying that books are dead because there isn't a current "Harry Potter" is like saying pop music is dead because there's no current Beatlemania, absurd.
Maybe the latest success story is soft porn for housewives. That's still a book. Your distaste for it doesn't negate the fact that it's a book and people are reading it.