View Single Post
Old 06-21-2013, 12:55 PM   #6
leebase
Karma Kameleon
leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
leebase's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,908
Karma: 26616647
Join Date: Aug 2009
Device: iPad Mini, iPhone X, Kindle Fire Tab HD 8, Walmart Onn
Quote:
Originally Posted by crossi View Post
Amazon wasn't selling most books below cost. Just some. Most businesses regularly have "loss leaders" to entice customers to their stores. It is a common and completely legal retail practice. Amazon'e ebook store wasn't even close to operating at a loss.
The entire NYT Bestseller's list which accounts for the majority of the profits publishers make.

You can't argue that Amazon didn't sell many books bellow cost and "Agency pricing is harming consumers" in the same breath. Either "not many" books' pricing were affected -- or lots of them were. A million "back list" titles and indie titles don't amount to a hill of beans compared to the 100 Top Selling jus released books.
leebase is offline   Reply With Quote