Quote:
Originally Posted by fjtorres
The stated intent of using the market power of the combined entity to enforce better margins carries with it the hidden assumption that consumers will put up with the enforced higher prices (possible, even likely in some regions) and that authors and their agents will be forced to swallow the new rate structures.
That second assumption strikes me as a bit less likely, as witnessed by Mr Turow's gang suddenly remembering their club is called the Authors' Guild and not the Publishing Guild.
Given enough blowback on the traditionalist front and the ongoing evolution of medium/small publishers it isn't hard to envision that combined market power withering away in a couple of years. Right around the time the merger disruption settles down.
Complicated indeed.
|
Who has actually stated this as the intent? The scholarly kitchen has said that perhaps it is the rationale behind the merger, but did not quote anyone as saying this was the intent. If a Random house or Penguin person has actually stated that that is their intent as you seem to be saying, then I am wondering why this has received less media attention and mass protests from authors, consumers, courts etc. While not collusion, such a statement of intent would seem to be enough to squash any merger.
Helen